From lancelot at inetnebr.com Wed Dec 1 00:25:31 2004 From: lancelot at inetnebr.com (lance dyas) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 07:25:31 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Dodge and Parry In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41AC74CB.9000801@inetnebr.com> Bjorn Stolen wrote: >> However, in SPQR, I specifically say that dodges or parries may be used >> against any and all attacks. Just as in the old RQ I said that an >> "attack" >> was actually a flurry of blows attempting to set up the target for >> the one >> that gets through, I work on the theory that a parry or dodge covers all >> incoming attacks. In fact, I don't differentiate between the two actions >> very well because I have been ignoring damage to parrying equipment, >> which I >> intend to change after some recent experience in playtesting another >> game. > > > Well, I don't like you wiew, as I find it too unrealistic. Unless the Action is dolled out in 1 second increments or less like GURPS visualising it as one strike and one parry in real world terms is unrealistic Actually you dont like it's event density or actually lack there of.... using an attack and a defense as an entire battle could be another valid option. which you wouldn't like either.;-) and the results could be either realistic or not. These mechanics also do not aid in higher detailed results you prefer ( Note the gm and players could still describe the action with great details) Separating combat skill into defense and attack is not necessarily realistic either as good defenses act to give you better openings to attack and good attacks can interupt your opponents atttacks thereby acting as a defense.... there is no hard line. > But I will not start to dispute your rules as Ihave no problem with > you playing RPG's the way you like. Prioritizing between realism and > playability; it's an eternal dilemma, and those of you who have > bothered with scanning through my houserules will know that I'm a detail well the detail orientation is noteable from your comments. but without further info realism is not even on the table. > and realism-freak! > > _________________________________________________________________ > Last ned MSN Messenger gratis http://www.msn.no/computing/messenger - > Den korteste veien mellom deg og dine venner > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > > . > -- Google Me at : Decision Driven Rolegaming -- Lance Dyas Destiny Diceless Roleplaying - at the Decision Driven Gaming Center http://www.dyasdesigns.com/roleplay/decision_driven.html From grogthing at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 02:41:08 2004 From: grogthing at yahoo.com (grogthing) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 07:41:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest In-Reply-To: <41AC21EF.30804@brinkdata.se> Message-ID: <20041130154108.13350.qmail@web41522.mail.yahoo.com> Hey Rolemaster! Always like the rolling system. Gregory --- Peter Brink wrote: > Steve Perrin skrev: > > > > Assume, if you will, that the goal is to be 100% > in effect. You are trained > > to, say, 55% with your weapon, but you want to be > 100% with this particular > > blow. You can only rely on chance... > > > > Which is to say, that the method of deriving > success is to roll the d100 and > > add your current skill. If your combined roll > equals 100 or more, you are > > successful. A critical could be a total combined > roll of 100, exactly. Not > > sure what to do about a special, though. > > > > Why limit the system to combats? I've seen a lot of > Target Number and > Success Ratio systems for BRP, and one of those > would blend nicely with > your idea. > > Let us keep the assumption that 100 is equal to > success. Easy tasks > should be easier to accomplish and more difficult > ones much less so. > > Here is a list of suggested mods: > > Difficulty Modification > ======================================= > Routine Success granted > Extremely easy +50 > Very easy +25 > Easy +15 > Easier than normal +5 > Normal +0 > Somewhat difficult -5 > Difficult -15 > Very difficult -25 > Extremely difficult -50 > > At this point the result of (Dice roll - 100) will > give us an idea of > how well the character accomplished his task. As a > general rule assume > that a result of 100 points more than needed is > equal to absolute > success and a roll 100 points less than needed is > equal to absolute failure. > > The system could also be extended with an "open > ended roll", i.e. all > rolls of 96-00 would mean another d100 roll, adding > the new roll to the > grand total. A roll of 96-00 on the second roll > would give a third roll > and so on. Rolls of 01-05 would mean a new d100 > roll, the result of > which would be deducted from the grand total, etc. > > /Peter Brink > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > ===== "I have sworn, upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." - Thomas Jefferson "It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." - Thomas Jefferson "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" - Patrick Henry "A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious." - Aristotle __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do? http://my.yahoo.com From slposey at concentric.net Wed Dec 1 07:01:03 2004 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 12:01:03 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest In-Reply-To: <010e01c4d69e$dfbdef00$68417442@wizard> References: <006001c4d68b$847eb0b0$68417442@wizard> <41AC013E.8080805@inetnebr.com> <010e01c4d69e$dfbdef00$68417442@wizard> Message-ID: <41ACD17F.5080708@concentric.net> Steve Perrin wrote: > Actually, I used a kind of degree of success roll, subtracting in standard > BRP style, for my Black 9 Ops rules. > > This was a project meant to be a paper and pencil version of a computer > game. Unfortunately, the computer game never got out the door. Fortunately, > I got paid for my work. > > If anyone would like a copy of the rules, let me know. They are rather > sizeable bitewise because of the illustrations I tacked in, but if you are > interested and can deal with a download of between one and two MB, I'll be > happy to pass it along. It's an interesting take off on BRP. Yes indeedy, I'll take a copy! Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From freyrvanic at earthlink.net Wed Dec 1 07:29:46 2004 From: freyrvanic at earthlink.net (Sven Lugar) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 12:29:46 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest Message-ID: <410-2200411230202946671@earthlink.net> I too would be interested in them. thank you for the very kind offer. Sven > [Original Message] > From: Steve Perrin > To: RuneQuest rules discussion. > Date: 11/29/2004 9:40:04 PM > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest > > Actually, I used a kind of degree of success roll, subtracting in standard > BRP style, for my Black 9 Ops rules. > > This was a project meant to be a paper and pencil version of a computer > game. Unfortunately, the computer game never got out the door. Fortunately, > I got paid for my work. > > If anyone would like a copy of the rules, let me know. They are rather > sizeable bitewise because of the illustrations I tacked in, but if you are > interested and can deal with a download of between one and two MB, I'll be > happy to pass it along. It's an interesting take off on BRP. > > ------------------------------------ > Chaos Limited > Steve Perrin > Sole Proprietor > steve at perrinworlds.com > ------------------------------------ > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "lance dyas" > To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." > Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 9:12 PM > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest > > > > I like it, ok I didn't test it. but the idea is pretty well founded even > > so. The idea that functioning at 100% means you succeed is rather > intuitive > > > > Another thought might be to show differing difficulties of skills not > > by altering the number of successes needed > > (that terminology drives my brain nuts I will call it degree of > > success) but by scaling the thresholds to achieve each "degree of > > success" 25% per degree of success might be normal where as a hard skill > > might be 30% a very hard 35% > > 20% might be for a simple skill. > > > > simple skill > > 100% = 1 degree of success > > 120% = 2 degrees of success > > 140% = 3 degrees of success > > 160% = 4 degrees of success > > > > hard skill > > 100% = 1 degree of success > > 130% = 2 degrees of success > > 160% = 3 degrees of success > > > > hmmm not sure if this gives anything .... hmmm never mind. > > > > Steve Perrin wrote: > > > > >A lot of people like RQ's and its derived systems' focus on "rolling low" > to > > >succeed. Others prefer the rolling high concepts of D&D and other games. > > > > > >In a playtest of the FANGS game, I've been dealing with a system of > rolling > > >high with a d20 that has inspired me to look again at the RQ/BRP core > > >system. > > > > > >Assume, if you will, that the goal is to be 100% in effect. You are > trained > > >to, say, 55% with your weapon, but you want to be 100% with this > particular > > >blow. You can only rely on chance... > > > > > >Which is to say, that the method of deriving success is to roll the d100 > and > > >add your current skill. If your combined roll equals 100 or more, you are > > >successful. A critical could be a total combined roll of 100, exactly. > Not > > >sure what to do about a special, though. > > > > > >Now, this jibes better with SPQR's system of successes. Off the top of my > > >head, 100+ is one success, 125+ is two successes, 150+ is 3 successes, > etc. > > >Various adders and subtracters make such rolls more or less likely. > > >Something similar could be done with specials in regular RQ, but it means > > >that, for instance, characters with really bad rolls would never have the > > >chance of getting a special. > > > > > >Think about it, run a couple of practice combats, let me know what you > > >think. > > > > > >Steve Perrin > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >RQ-Rules mailing list > > >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > >http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > > >http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > > > > > >. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Google Me at : Decision Driven Rolegaming > > > > -- Lance Dyas > > Destiny Diceless Roleplaying - at the Decision Driven Gaming Center > > http://www.dyasdesigns.com/roleplay/decision_driven.html > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > RQ-Rules mailing list > > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules From zeitgeistgeist at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 08:35:49 2004 From: zeitgeistgeist at yahoo.com (zeitgeistgeist at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 13:35:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest In-Reply-To: <010e01c4d69e$dfbdef00$68417442@wizard> Message-ID: <20041130213549.47173.qmail@web53004.mail.yahoo.com> When the esteemed Mr. Perrin offers a BRP variant, I get all excited! May I have one please? -Shea --- Steve Perrin wrote: > Actually, I used a kind of degree of success roll, > subtracting in standard > BRP style, for my Black 9 Ops rules. > > This was a project meant to be a paper and pencil > version of a computer > game. Unfortunately, the computer game never got out > the door. Fortunately, > I got paid for my work. > > If anyone would like a copy of the rules, let me > know. They are rather > sizeable bitewise because of the illustrations I > tacked in, but if you are > interested and can deal with a download of between > one and two MB, I'll be > happy to pass it along. It's an interesting take off > on BRP. > > ------------------------------------ > Chaos Limited > Steve Perrin > Sole Proprietor > steve at perrinworlds.com > ------------------------------------ > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "lance dyas" > To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." > > Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 9:12 PM > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in > RuneQuest > > > > I like it, ok I didn't test it. but the idea is > pretty well founded even > > so. The idea that functioning at 100% means you > succeed is rather > intuitive > > > > Another thought might be to show differing > difficulties of skills not > > by altering the number of successes needed > > (that terminology drives my brain nuts I will call > it degree of > > success) but by scaling the thresholds to achieve > each "degree of > > success" 25% per degree of success might be normal > where as a hard skill > > might be 30% a very hard 35% > > 20% might be for a simple skill. > > > > simple skill > > 100% = 1 degree of success > > 120% = 2 degrees of success > > 140% = 3 degrees of success > > 160% = 4 degrees of success > > > > hard skill > > 100% = 1 degree of success > > 130% = 2 degrees of success > > 160% = 3 degrees of success > > > > hmmm not sure if this gives anything .... hmmm > never mind. > > > > Steve Perrin wrote: > > > > >A lot of people like RQ's and its derived > systems' focus on "rolling low" > to > > >succeed. Others prefer the rolling high concepts > of D&D and other games. > > > > > >In a playtest of the FANGS game, I've been > dealing with a system of > rolling > > >high with a d20 that has inspired me to look > again at the RQ/BRP core > > >system. > > > > > >Assume, if you will, that the goal is to be 100% > in effect. You are > trained > > >to, say, 55% with your weapon, but you want to be > 100% with this > particular > > >blow. You can only rely on chance... > > > > > >Which is to say, that the method of deriving > success is to roll the d100 > and > > >add your current skill. If your combined roll > equals 100 or more, you are > > >successful. A critical could be a total combined > roll of 100, exactly. > Not > > >sure what to do about a special, though. > > > > > >Now, this jibes better with SPQR's system of > successes. Off the top of my > > >head, 100+ is one success, 125+ is two successes, > 150+ is 3 successes, > etc. > > >Various adders and subtracters make such rolls > more or less likely. > > >Something similar could be done with specials in > regular RQ, but it means > > >that, for instance, characters with really bad > rolls would never have the > > >chance of getting a special. > > > > > >Think about it, run a couple of practice combats, > let me know what you > > >think. > > > > > >Steve Perrin > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >RQ-Rules mailing list > > >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > >http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > > > >http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > > > > > >. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Google Me at : Decision Driven Rolegaming > > > > -- Lance Dyas > > Destiny Diceless Roleplaying - at the Decision > Driven Gaming Center > > > http://www.dyasdesigns.com/roleplay/decision_driven.html > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > RQ-Rules mailing list > > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > > > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo From tim at domibia.com Wed Dec 1 09:04:52 2004 From: tim at domibia.com (Tim Huntley) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 14:04:52 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest References: <20041130213549.47173.qmail@web53004.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000a01c4d728$9ee3a800$01080165@scuhs.edu> > if you are > interested and can deal with a download of between > one and two MB, I'll be > happy to pass it along. I am, in fact, interested, and I can, in fact, deal with a 1-2mb download. :-) Tim. From grogthing at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 09:22:41 2004 From: grogthing at yahoo.com (grogthing) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 14:22:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest In-Reply-To: <20041130213549.47173.qmail@web53004.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041130222241.34249.qmail@web41506.mail.yahoo.com> Oh me too please! Gregory --- zeitgeistgeist at yahoo.com wrote: > When the esteemed Mr. Perrin offers a BRP variant, > I get all excited! > > May I have one please? > > -Shea > > --- Steve Perrin wrote: > > > Actually, I used a kind of degree of success roll, > > subtracting in standard > > BRP style, for my Black 9 Ops rules. > > > > This was a project meant to be a paper and pencil > > version of a computer > > game. Unfortunately, the computer game never got > out > > the door. Fortunately, > > I got paid for my work. > > > > If anyone would like a copy of the rules, let me > > know. They are rather > > sizeable bitewise because of the illustrations I > > tacked in, but if you are > > interested and can deal with a download of between > > one and two MB, I'll be > > happy to pass it along. It's an interesting take > off > > on BRP. > > > > ------------------------------------ > > Chaos Limited > > Steve Perrin > > Sole Proprietor > > steve at perrinworlds.com > > ------------------------------------ > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "lance dyas" > > To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." > > > > Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 9:12 PM > > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in > > RuneQuest > > > > > > > I like it, ok I didn't test it. but the idea is > > pretty well founded even > > > so. The idea that functioning at 100% means you > > succeed is rather > > intuitive > > > > > > Another thought might be to show differing > > difficulties of skills not > > > by altering the number of successes needed > > > (that terminology drives my brain nuts I will > call > > it degree of > > > success) but by scaling the thresholds to > achieve > > each "degree of > > > success" 25% per degree of success might be > normal > > where as a hard skill > > > might be 30% a very hard 35% > > > 20% might be for a simple skill. > > > > > > simple skill > > > 100% = 1 degree of success > > > 120% = 2 degrees of success > > > 140% = 3 degrees of success > > > 160% = 4 degrees of success > > > > > > hard skill > > > 100% = 1 degree of success > > > 130% = 2 degrees of success > > > 160% = 3 degrees of success > > > > > > hmmm not sure if this gives anything .... hmmm > > never mind. > > > > > > Steve Perrin wrote: > > > > > > >A lot of people like RQ's and its derived > > systems' focus on "rolling low" > > to > > > >succeed. Others prefer the rolling high > concepts > > of D&D and other games. > > > > > > > >In a playtest of the FANGS game, I've been > > dealing with a system of > > rolling > > > >high with a d20 that has inspired me to look > > again at the RQ/BRP core > > > >system. > > > > > > > >Assume, if you will, that the goal is to be > 100% > > in effect. You are > > trained > > > >to, say, 55% with your weapon, but you want to > be > > 100% with this > > particular > > > >blow. You can only rely on chance... > > > > > > > >Which is to say, that the method of deriving > > success is to roll the d100 > > and > > > >add your current skill. If your combined roll > > equals 100 or more, you are > > > >successful. A critical could be a total > combined > > roll of 100, exactly. > > Not > > > >sure what to do about a special, though. > > > > > > > >Now, this jibes better with SPQR's system of > > successes. Off the top of my > > > >head, 100+ is one success, 125+ is two > successes, > > 150+ is 3 successes, > > etc. > > > >Various adders and subtracters make such rolls > > more or less likely. > > > >Something similar could be done with specials > in > > regular RQ, but it means > > > >that, for instance, characters with really bad > > rolls would never have the > > > >chance of getting a special. > > > > > > > >Think about it, run a couple of practice > combats, > > let me know what you > > > >think. > > > > > > > >Steve Perrin > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > > >RQ-Rules mailing list > > > >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > > >http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > > > > > > >http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > > > > > > > >. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Google Me at : Decision Driven Rolegaming > > > > > > -- Lance Dyas > > > Destiny Diceless Roleplaying - at the Decision > > Driven Gaming Center > > > > > > http://www.dyasdesigns.com/roleplay/decision_driven.html > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > RQ-Rules mailing list > > > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > > > > > > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > > > > _______________________________________________ > > RQ-Rules mailing list > > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > > > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > > > > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile > phone. > http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > ===== "I have sworn, upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." - Thomas Jefferson "It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." - Thomas Jefferson "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" - Patrick Henry "A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious." - Aristotle __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From jurrubin at earthlink.net Wed Dec 1 11:52:29 2004 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 18:52:29 -0600 (GMT-06:00) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest Message-ID: <12329289.1101862349892.JavaMail.root@fozzie.psp.pas.earthlink.net> I also would love to see a copy, if I may. David Smart -----Original Message----- From: zeitgeistgeist at yahoo.com Sent: Nov 30, 2004 3:35 PM To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest When the esteemed Mr. Perrin offers a BRP variant, I get all excited! May I have one please? -Shea --- Steve Perrin wrote: > Actually, I used a kind of degree of success roll, > subtracting in standard > BRP style, for my Black 9 Ops rules. > If anyone would like a copy of the rules, let me > know. From katkin_kalvin at yahoo.com Wed Dec 1 12:04:43 2004 From: katkin_kalvin at yahoo.com (John Raner) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 17:04:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest In-Reply-To: <41ACD17F.5080708@concentric.net> Message-ID: <20041201010443.97137.qmail@web53710.mail.yahoo.com> --- Stephen Posey wrote: > > If anyone would like a copy of the rules, let me > know. They are rather > > sizeable bitewise because of the illustrations I > tacked in, but if you are > > interested and can deal with a download of between > one and two MB, I'll be > > happy to pass it along. It's an interesting take > off on BRP. > > Yes indeedy, I'll take a copy! I would be very interested in a copy as well :) Cheers, John ===== "Keep a government poor and weak and it's your servant; let it get rich and powerful and it's your master." ---- Colonel Andrew Jackson Hickok A state, is called the coldest of all cold monsters. Coldly lieth it also; and this lie creepeth from its mouth: "I, the state, am the people." ---- Friedrich Nietzsche "It is a shame that governments are chiefed by the devil tongues" ---- Chief Ten Bears "There is no such thing as an obsolete weapon or tool, merely obsolete thinking in its employ." ---- Mark D. (CapnCarp at yahoo.com) __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From tcantine at incentre.net Wed Dec 1 14:37:12 2004 From: tcantine at incentre.net (Tom Cantine) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 20:37:12 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Getting out of Dodge In-Reply-To: <20041130054014.F3577222771@boomstick.screwheads.net> References: <20041130054014.F3577222771@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: <49B7B1B6-434A-11D9-AE14-000D9334A9EA@incentre.net> > Bjorn rebutted thusly: > >> (I don't actually read it as putting the dodger out of reach >> necessarily, >> just out of the actual lines of attack.) > > Well, I do. Only stepping out of the line of attack (-or stepping of > the > line as we call it in WMA) takes at least as long time as it takes to > attack. Therefore there would be no realistic reason why a dodge should > count for all attacks done by one attacker. In that case, the > dodge-ability > would from a tactical point of wiew be pointless, since a dodge have > the > potential of damaging the attacking weapon. > > If you rule a dodge as "getting the ***** out of Dodge"- as I do; one > could > say that it's realistic with a dodge beeing able to cope with all > attacks > done by one attacker, as you're effectively running/jumping away that > round. > Stepping of the line is in my head integrated in the parry-action as > it's an > integrated part of making parry-reposts and in defencive techniques > dedicated to deck incoming attackers. > All right, but bear in mind that one can combine a Dodge with an Attack action. If Dodge means putting oneself out of range of all attacks, rather than simply avoiding all attempts that would otherwise have hit, then you have to assume the character somehow also scoots back into range to attack. I don't mean your interpretation is inadmissible, and it is probably very appropriate for many cases. Only that it is not necessary, and probably should not be applied in many (even most) instances. From steve at perrinworlds.com Wed Dec 1 14:53:37 2004 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 19:53:37 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest References: <006001c4d68b$847eb0b0$68417442@wizard> <41AC21EF.30804@brinkdata.se> Message-ID: <00c501c4d759$c6d3b180$68417442@wizard> Sorry, I am very combat oriented - it's the reason RuneQuest happened, essentially. But yes, certainly the scheme could be used for all dice rolls. That was the intent. Steve ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter Brink" To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 11:31 PM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest > Steve Perrin skrev: > > > > Assume, if you will, that the goal is to be 100% in effect. You are trained > > to, say, 55% with your weapon, but you want to be 100% with this particular > > blow. You can only rely on chance... > > > > Which is to say, that the method of deriving success is to roll the d100 and > > add your current skill. If your combined roll equals 100 or more, you are > > successful. A critical could be a total combined roll of 100, exactly. Not > > sure what to do about a special, though. > > > > Why limit the system to combats? I've seen a lot of Target Number and > Success Ratio systems for BRP, and one of those would blend nicely with > your idea. > > Let us keep the assumption that 100 is equal to success. Easy tasks > should be easier to accomplish and more difficult ones much less so. > > Here is a list of suggested mods: > > Difficulty Modification > ======================================= > Routine Success granted > Extremely easy +50 > Very easy +25 > Easy +15 > Easier than normal +5 > Normal +0 > Somewhat difficult -5 > Difficult -15 > Very difficult -25 > Extremely difficult -50 > > At this point the result of (Dice roll - 100) will give us an idea of > how well the character accomplished his task. As a general rule assume > that a result of 100 points more than needed is equal to absolute > success and a roll 100 points less than needed is equal to absolute failure. > > The system could also be extended with an "open ended roll", i.e. all > rolls of 96-00 would mean another d100 roll, adding the new roll to the > grand total. A roll of 96-00 on the second roll would give a third roll > and so on. Rolls of 01-05 would mean a new d100 roll, the result of > which would be deducted from the grand total, etc. > > /Peter Brink > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > From steve at perrinworlds.com Wed Dec 1 14:58:38 2004 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 19:58:38 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Black9 Ops rules References: <006001c4d68b$847eb0b0$68417442@wizard> <41AC013E.8080805@inetnebr.com> <010e01c4d69e$dfbdef00$68417442@wizard> Message-ID: <00fd01c4d75a$e8b3c320$68417442@wizard> I've sent off Ken's copy, as I have anyone else who has asked on the list. However, I really should have said to contact me off list for copies. If only because it removes at least one step I have to take to send the ms to you, rather than the list. And I am expecting reactions, folks, which you can either just send to me or put on the list if you think they are pertinent to a BRP-style game discussion. Steve ----- Original Message ----- From: To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 10:04 PM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest Steve talks a bit about his Black 9 Ops rules. If anyone would like a copy of the rules, let me know. They are rather sizeable bitewise because of the illustrations I tacked in, but if you are interested and can deal with a download of between one and two MB, I'll be happy to pass it along. It's an interesting take off on BRP. Hiya Steve, Yes, I'd be very interested in seeing these rules. Thanks :) -Ken Murphy- _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules From freyrvanic at earthlink.net Wed Dec 1 15:08:47 2004 From: freyrvanic at earthlink.net (Sven Lugar) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 20:08:47 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest Message-ID: <410-2200412314847625@earthlink.net> That's what made it appeal to me back in the SCA when we're talking. The consistancy & speed as well as accuracy of feel. BTW I dug up an old picture of you from those days. Want me to scan it in & send it to you? manga takk, Sven > [Original Message] > From: Steve Perrin > To: RuneQuest rules discussion. > Date: 11/30/2004 7:57:37 PM > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest > > Sorry, I am very combat oriented - it's the reason RuneQuest happened, > essentially. But yes, certainly the scheme could be used for all dice rolls. > That was the intent. > > Steve > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Peter Brink" > To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." > Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 11:31 PM > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest > > > > Steve Perrin skrev: > > > > > > Assume, if you will, that the goal is to be 100% in effect. You are > trained > > > to, say, 55% with your weapon, but you want to be 100% with this > particular > > > blow. You can only rely on chance... > > > > > > Which is to say, that the method of deriving success is to roll the d100 > and > > > add your current skill. If your combined roll equals 100 or more, you > are > > > successful. A critical could be a total combined roll of 100, exactly. > Not > > > sure what to do about a special, though. > > > > > > > Why limit the system to combats? I've seen a lot of Target Number and > > Success Ratio systems for BRP, and one of those would blend nicely with > > your idea. > > > > Let us keep the assumption that 100 is equal to success. Easy tasks > > should be easier to accomplish and more difficult ones much less so. > > > > Here is a list of suggested mods: > > > > Difficulty Modification > > ======================================= > > Routine Success granted > > Extremely easy +50 > > Very easy +25 > > Easy +15 > > Easier than normal +5 > > Normal +0 > > Somewhat difficult -5 > > Difficult -15 > > Very difficult -25 > > Extremely difficult -50 > > > > At this point the result of (Dice roll - 100) will give us an idea of > > how well the character accomplished his task. As a general rule assume > > that a result of 100 points more than needed is equal to absolute > > success and a roll 100 points less than needed is equal to absolute > failure. > > > > The system could also be extended with an "open ended roll", i.e. all > > rolls of 96-00 would mean another d100 roll, adding the new roll to the > > grand total. A roll of 96-00 on the second roll would give a third roll > > and so on. Rolls of 01-05 would mean a new d100 roll, the result of > > which would be deducted from the grand total, etc. > > > > /Peter Brink > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > RQ-Rules mailing list > > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules From steve at perrinworlds.com Wed Dec 1 15:02:35 2004 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 20:02:35 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest References: <20041130154108.13350.qmail@web41522.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <014b01c4d75b$e70affb0$68417442@wizard> Is that a Rolemaster artifact? I never played the game, all those creation tables really scared me off... ----- Original Message ----- From: "grogthing" To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 7:41 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest > Hey Rolemaster! > > Always like the rolling system. > > Gregory > > --- Peter Brink wrote: > > > Steve Perrin skrev: > > > > > > Assume, if you will, that the goal is to be 100% > > in effect. You are trained > > > to, say, 55% with your weapon, but you want to be > > 100% with this particular > > > blow. You can only rely on chance... > > > > > > Which is to say, that the method of deriving > > success is to roll the d100 and > > > add your current skill. If your combined roll > > equals 100 or more, you are > > > successful. A critical could be a total combined > > roll of 100, exactly. Not > > > sure what to do about a special, though. > > > > > > > Why limit the system to combats? I've seen a lot of > > Target Number and > > Success Ratio systems for BRP, and one of those > > would blend nicely with > > your idea. > > > > Let us keep the assumption that 100 is equal to > > success. Easy tasks > > should be easier to accomplish and more difficult > > ones much less so. > > > > Here is a list of suggested mods: > > > > Difficulty Modification > > ======================================= > > Routine Success granted > > Extremely easy +50 > > Very easy +25 > > Easy +15 > > Easier than normal +5 > > Normal +0 > > Somewhat difficult -5 > > Difficult -15 > > Very difficult -25 > > Extremely difficult -50 > > > > At this point the result of (Dice roll - 100) will > > give us an idea of > > how well the character accomplished his task. As a > > general rule assume > > that a result of 100 points more than needed is > > equal to absolute > > success and a roll 100 points less than needed is > > equal to absolute failure. > > > > The system could also be extended with an "open > > ended roll", i.e. all > > rolls of 96-00 would mean another d100 roll, adding > > the new roll to the > > grand total. A roll of 96-00 on the second roll > > would give a third roll > > and so on. Rolls of 01-05 would mean a new d100 > > roll, the result of > > which would be deducted from the grand total, etc. > > > > /Peter Brink > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > RQ-Rules mailing list > > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > > > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > > > > > ===== > "I have sworn, upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every > form of tyranny over the mind of man." - Thomas Jefferson > > "It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." - Thomas Jefferson > > "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" - Patrick Henry > > "A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious." - Aristotle > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do? > http://my.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > From ghoyle1 at sbcglobal.net Wed Dec 1 15:13:16 2004 From: ghoyle1 at sbcglobal.net (Guy Hoyle) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 22:13:16 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest In-Reply-To: <20041201010443.97137.qmail@web53710.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041201010443.97137.qmail@web53710.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41AD44DC.3070401@sbcglobal.net> Is it too late to jump on the bandwagon? I even brought a sousaphone *bwaaaaaaaaat*!!! Guy Hoyle ghoyle1 at airmail.net John Raner wrote: >--- Stephen Posey wrote: > > >>>If anyone would like a copy of the rules, let me >>> >>> >>know. They are rather >> >> >>>sizeable bitewise because of the illustrations I >>> >>> >>tacked in, but if you are >> >> >>>interested and can deal with a download of between >>> >>> >>one and two MB, I'll be >> >> >>>happy to pass it along. It's an interesting take >>> >>> >>off on BRP. >> >>Yes indeedy, I'll take a copy! >> >> > >I would be very interested in a copy as well :) > >Cheers, >John > >===== >"Keep a government poor and weak and it's your servant; let it get rich and powerful and it's your master." >---- Colonel Andrew Jackson Hickok > >A state, is called the coldest of all cold monsters. Coldly lieth it also; and this lie creepeth from its mouth: "I, the state, am the people." >---- Friedrich Nietzsche > >"It is a shame that governments are chiefed by the devil tongues" >---- Chief Ten Bears > >"There is no such thing as an obsolete weapon or tool, merely obsolete thinking in its employ." >---- Mark D. (CapnCarp at yahoo.com) > > > >__________________________________ >Do you Yahoo!? >Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. >http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail >_______________________________________________ >RQ-Rules mailing list >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com >http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules >http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > > > From steve at perrinworlds.com Wed Dec 1 15:25:10 2004 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 20:25:10 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Getting out the Black 9 Ops References: <12329289.1101862349892.JavaMail.root@fozzie.psp.pas.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <01f701c4d75f$e0624ca0$68417442@wizard> If anyone up to this point who has asked me for a copy hasn't received one, please let me know. My system started backing up and sending out the copies started to get a bit fragmented, so I am not sure I actually have answered everyone's request. Steve ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Smart" To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 4:52 PM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest > I also would love to see a copy, if I may. > > David Smart > > -----Original Message----- > From: zeitgeistgeist at yahoo.com > Sent: Nov 30, 2004 3:35 PM > To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest > > When the esteemed Mr. Perrin offers a BRP variant, > I get all excited! > > May I have one please? > > -Shea > > --- Steve Perrin wrote: > > > Actually, I used a kind of degree of success roll, > > subtracting in standard > > BRP style, for my Black 9 Ops rules. > > > If anyone would like a copy of the rules, let me > > know. > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules From slposey at concentric.net Wed Dec 1 16:17:40 2004 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 21:17:40 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Getting out the Black 9 Ops In-Reply-To: <01f701c4d75f$e0624ca0$68417442@wizard> References: <12329289.1101862349892.JavaMail.root@fozzie.psp.pas.earthlink.net> <01f701c4d75f$e0624ca0$68417442@wizard> Message-ID: <41AD53F4.6050004@concentric.net> Steve Perrin wrote: > If anyone up to this point who has asked me for a copy hasn't received one, > please let me know. My system started backing up and sending out the copies > started to get a bit fragmented, so I am not sure I actually have answered > everyone's request. > > Steve Just for the record, I received it twice. Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From Alain.RAMEAU at total.com Wed Dec 1 19:15:02 2004 From: Alain.RAMEAU at total.com (Alain.RAMEAU at total.com) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 09:15:02 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Alternate success levels system Message-ID: Indeed, this is similar to my Gloranthan Wars system (only available in French). However, I am not sure it adds anything to have two levels of succes as you do, because in your example (or once your character reach about 100%) she has nearly the same chance of rolling a critical or a special, which does not make sense IMO. I faced the same problem, so I dropped the two level successes. I keep the 1/10 of the skill for a critical success, and the missed double for a critical failure. Using a double to calculate the critical success did not work above 100% skill as the charctarer would not have any upside. On the other hand, above 100%, the character can no longer fumble now, which is fine for me. The option to have a "super critical" being a critical (1/10) which is also a double, could potentially work though, but I did not go for that (will not happen very often, and only once the character reach 100%) but I'll think about it for high level campaigns. I also allowed a character with more than 100% to have an option : either reduce the adversary skill by the difference (skill-100%), or keep the current skill as it is. As an exemple , 120% vs 50% : either roll 100% (with a 1-10 special possibility "only") but have the adversary rolling only 30% (nearly halfing his skill !), or keeping the adversary skill at 50% but roll 120% (with a 1-12 possibility of special). If both charater have above 100%, the higher decide of the option. http://karamo.nexenservices.com/glowar/rq.htm Alain ----- Message de Patrice BOUSQUET sur Tue, 30 Nov 2004 11:32:54 +0100 ----- Pour: "RuneQuest rules discussion." Objet: R?f. : Re: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest I'd like to have a look to this system. Can you send me one copy, steve? Actually, I'm seriously studying another success rating system: I think resolution tables or any calculation during game break the game flow. I wish statistics purists will forgive me but I tried the following method: 1-A dice roll under the skill is a success except if 2- the roll is equal or under the tenth of the skill (i.e. for a 86% skill, 8 or less), where it become a special success 3- the dices give a "double" (don't know english term: i.e. the dices roll 11, 22, 33, 44,...) in wich case we have a critical roll. By the same way, "doubles" over the skill are critical misses. I don't know actually if it's interesting to give a different success if the roll is equal to the skill. For master skills, it's possible to give a "double special" for 1/100th of skill (i.e. 1 or 2 rolled for a 268% skill, 3-26 being still a special) By this way, players know immediately their success and the game get more fluid. I wait for comments... Patrice From andyl at azaal.plus.com Wed Dec 1 19:35:14 2004 From: andyl at azaal.plus.com (Andy Leighton) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 08:35:14 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest In-Reply-To: <41AD44DC.3070401@sbcglobal.net> References: <20041201010443.97137.qmail@web53710.mail.yahoo.com> <41AD44DC.3070401@sbcglobal.net> Message-ID: <20041201083514.GA9136@azaal.plus.com> On Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 10:13:16PM -0600, Guy Hoyle wrote: > Is it too late to jump on the bandwagon? I even brought a sousaphone > *bwaaaaaaaaat*!!! Can I add a me too. -- Andy Leighton => andyl at azaal.plus.com "The Lord is my shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials" - Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_ From ghoyle1 at sbcglobal.net Wed Dec 1 22:37:49 2004 From: ghoyle1 at sbcglobal.net (Guy Hoyle) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 05:37:49 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Getting out the Black 9 Ops In-Reply-To: <01f701c4d75f$e0624ca0$68417442@wizard> References: <12329289.1101862349892.JavaMail.root@fozzie.psp.pas.earthlink.net> <01f701c4d75f$e0624ca0$68417442@wizard> Message-ID: <41ADAD0D.7000404@sbcglobal.net> Steve Perrin wrote: >If anyone up to this point who has asked me for a copy hasn't received one, >please let me know. My system started backing up and sending out the copies >started to get a bit fragmented, so I am not sure I actually have answered >everyone's request. > >Steve > > I haven't received one yet. Guy From ameron1 at blueyonder.co.uk Thu Dec 2 00:00:51 2004 From: ameron1 at blueyonder.co.uk (Ian 'Earl' Martin) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 13:00:51 -0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 11, Issue 8 In-Reply-To: <20041201040601.84DC022277D@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: <000901c4d7a5$cac26650$6401a8c0@MASTER> Hi, Been reading this list for a long time now, but have not been playing or running RQ for a while, I have since started a new campaign and an event is about to bring up a question that I know I am going to need some guru'esque advice to...so: One of my players has just been initiated into the Odayla and Yinkin cult as of the cult right up in TorRM#18, as such I rolled up a shadow cat for him, and he found it during his initiation ceremony. The question I expect to follow soon is since a shadow cat has good POW and a fixed INT of 5 can it cast spirit magic spells? If it can, how are they taught it it? I see that Telmori companion wolves are allowed spells since one of the wolves in the Dorastor supplement has ironhand 2, this makes me think that an animal could learn spells but it's something I am very unsure of and would love some advice. Thanks. Ian. From aescleal at btinternet.com Thu Dec 2 00:31:45 2004 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (ASHLEY MUNDAY) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 13:31:45 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 11, Issue 8 In-Reply-To: <000901c4d7a5$cac26650$6401a8c0@MASTER> Message-ID: <20041201133145.98744.qmail@web86206.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> IIRC if a critter's got Fixed INT then it can't learn or cast magic*. Wouldn't surprise me if Yinkin had a ritual to awaken the intelligence of Alynx, but it'd probably only happen for advanced Initiates and runelords and priest. Another fun thing would be to get another player to play an awakened Alynx as the adventurer's sidekick. Cheers, Ash - who quite likes the idea of playing an Alynx... *A fixed INT critter can't learn knowledge skills either --- Ian 'Earl' Martin wrote: > Hi, Been reading this list for a long time now, but > have not been > playing or running RQ for a while, I have since > started a new campaign > and an event is about to bring up a question that I > know I am going to > need some guru'esque advice to...so: > One of my players has just been initiated into the > Odayla and Yinkin > cult as of the cult right up in TorRM#18, as such I > rolled up a shadow > cat for him, and he found it during his initiation > ceremony. The > question I expect to follow soon is since a shadow > cat has good POW and > a fixed INT of 5 can it cast spirit magic spells? If > it can, how are > they taught it it? > I see that Telmori companion wolves are allowed > spells since one of the > wolves in the Dorastor supplement has ironhand 2, > this makes me think > that an animal could learn spells but it's something > I am very unsure of > and would love some advice. > > Thanks. > > Ian. > > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > From bick10 at comcast.net Thu Dec 2 01:51:12 2004 From: bick10 at comcast.net (bick10 at comcast.net) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 14:51:12 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Pic of SCA-Steve. Message-ID: <120120041451.29864.41ADDA60000292EA000074A82207000953CFCE050C070D@comcast.net> > BTW I dug up an old > picture of you from those days. Want me to scan it in & send it to you? > manga takk, > Sven Actually, if Steve gave his consent, I for one would like to see the Quester back in his old SCA days. Sort of, put a face to the game I so ejoy. From grogthing at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 02:11:15 2004 From: grogthing at yahoo.com (grogthing) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 07:11:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest In-Reply-To: <014b01c4d75b$e70affb0$68417442@wizard> Message-ID: <20041201151116.46158.qmail@web41507.mail.yahoo.com> Yeah Rolemaster was alot like RQ. Percetile based. Except the Attributes were percentile as well instead of 20 base. You had an open ended percentile role, the higher the better. Reroll and add to total on roll of 96-00. Add skill percentiles, your percentile bonus for attributes, and situational modifier to come up with a percentile total. The system was actually pretty simple. But instead of a single resolution chart that could be applied to any action, they had a chart for almost every possible thing under the sun, all the same mechanics though. I think doubles results were treated special as well (rolling: 66,77,88,99,00,etc). Gregory --- Steve Perrin wrote: > Is that a Rolemaster artifact? I never played the > game, all those creation > tables really scared me off... > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "grogthing" > To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." > > Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 7:41 AM > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in > RuneQuest > > > > Hey Rolemaster! > > > > Always like the rolling system. > > > > Gregory > > > > --- Peter Brink wrote: > > > > > Steve Perrin skrev: > > > > > > > > Assume, if you will, that the goal is to be > 100% > > > in effect. You are trained > > > > to, say, 55% with your weapon, but you want to > be > > > 100% with this particular > > > > blow. You can only rely on chance... > > > > > > > > Which is to say, that the method of deriving > > > success is to roll the d100 and > > > > add your current skill. If your combined roll > > > equals 100 or more, you are > > > > successful. A critical could be a total > combined > > > roll of 100, exactly. Not > > > > sure what to do about a special, though. > > > > > > > > > > Why limit the system to combats? I've seen a lot > of > > > Target Number and > > > Success Ratio systems for BRP, and one of those > > > would blend nicely with > > > your idea. > > > > > > Let us keep the assumption that 100 is equal to > > > success. Easy tasks > > > should be easier to accomplish and more > difficult > > > ones much less so. > > > > > > Here is a list of suggested mods: > > > > > > Difficulty Modification > > > ======================================= > > > Routine Success granted > > > Extremely easy +50 > > > Very easy +25 > > > Easy +15 > > > Easier than normal +5 > > > Normal +0 > > > Somewhat difficult -5 > > > Difficult -15 > > > Very difficult -25 > > > Extremely difficult -50 > > > > > > At this point the result of (Dice roll - 100) > will > > > give us an idea of > > > how well the character accomplished his task. As > a > > > general rule assume > > > that a result of 100 points more than needed is > > > equal to absolute > > > success and a roll 100 points less than needed > is > > > equal to absolute failure. > > > > > > The system could also be extended with an "open > > > ended roll", i.e. all > > > rolls of 96-00 would mean another d100 roll, > adding > > > the new roll to the > > > grand total. A roll of 96-00 on the second roll > > > would give a third roll > > > and so on. Rolls of 01-05 would mean a new d100 > > > roll, the result of > > > which would be deducted from the grand total, > etc. > > > > > > /Peter Brink > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > RQ-Rules mailing list > > > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > > > > > > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > > > > > > > > > ===== > > "I have sworn, upon the altar of God, eternal > hostility against every > > form of tyranny over the mind of man." - Thomas > Jefferson > > > > "It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there > are twenty gods or no > god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." > - Thomas Jefferson > > > > "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be > purchased at the price of > chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know > not what course others > may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me > death!" - Patrick Henry > > > > "A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon > devotion to religion. > Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment > from a ruler whom they > consider god-fearing and pious." - Aristotle > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do? > > http://my.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > > RQ-Rules mailing list > > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > > > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > ===== "I have sworn, upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." - Thomas Jefferson "It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." - Thomas Jefferson "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" - Patrick Henry "A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious." - Aristotle __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From aescleal at btinternet.com Thu Dec 2 02:29:05 2004 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (ASHLEY MUNDAY) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 15:29:05 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest In-Reply-To: <20041201151116.46158.qmail@web41507.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041201152905.7115.qmail@web86206.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> "Yeah Rolemaster was alot like RQ." Rolemaster was more like an accountant's DnD - it had levels, classes, huge FO spell lists, critical hit charts that made the Arduin Grimoire's look sane and a lovely paragraph format and writing style stolen from SPI. Add to that the avalanche of charts (you'd have to be eidetic to play it just off the character sheet) and you had a game that was almost totally unlike RQ. AND it was 5 times the price of Runequest in 1982... Cheers, Ash From carpgachair at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 02:52:07 2004 From: carpgachair at yahoo.com (Paul Cardwell) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 07:52:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 11, Issue 8 In-Reply-To: <20041201133145.98744.qmail@web86206.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041201155208.26559.qmail@web51309.mail.yahoo.com> --- ASHLEY MUNDAY wrote: > IIRC if a critter's got Fixed INT then it can't > learn > or cast magic*. Wouldn't surprise me if Yinkin had a > ritual to awaken the intelligence of Alynx, but it'd > probably only happen for advanced Initiates and > runelords and priest. Let's assume that IQ=INT. It doesn't really, but there is a rough correlation between the two. Are you contending that only IQ over 100 can learn and IQ 60 cannot? Granted, there is some limitation on how much and/or how fast, but learning is possible even among the under INT 6 species which can't cast magic. INT can be fixed (as in RQ, Mythworld, and probably most other games) and learning, etc. can still occur. After all, if it can in the real world, it should be in a fictional one which also adds magic. Paul Cardwell __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? All your favorites on one personal page ? Try My Yahoo! http://my.yahoo.com From gkahla at chromebob.com Thu Dec 2 02:17:07 2004 From: gkahla at chromebob.com (Gerall Kahla) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 09:17:07 -0600 (CST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest In-Reply-To: <12329289.1101862349892.JavaMail.root@fozzie.psp.pas.earthlink.net> References: <12329289.1101862349892.JavaMail.root@fozzie.psp.pas.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <23596.65.70.252.73.1101914227.squirrel@65.70.252.73> > --- Steve Perrin wrote: > > Actually, I used a kind of degree of success roll, > subtracting in standard > BRP style, for my Black 9 Ops rules. > > If anyone would like a copy of the rules, let me > know. may i get a copy of these rules, as well? thanks for offering! -- be warned, fair traveller; there are no maps for these territories. Gerall Kahla / gkahla / autom4tic [http://chromebob.com/] From slposey at concentric.net Thu Dec 2 03:04:06 2004 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 08:04:06 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest In-Reply-To: <20041201152905.7115.qmail@web86206.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <20041201152905.7115.qmail@web86206.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41ADEB76.6080607@concentric.net> ASHLEY MUNDAY wrote: > "Yeah Rolemaster was alot like RQ." > > Rolemaster was more like an accountant's DnD - it had > levels, classes, huge FO spell lists, critical hit > charts that made the Arduin Grimoire's look sane and a > lovely paragraph format and writing style stolen from > SPI. > > Add to that the avalanche of charts (you'd have to be > eidetic to play it just off the character sheet) and > you had a game that was almost totally unlike RQ. > > AND it was 5 times the price of Runequest in 1982... RM had a few cool ideas here and there, but overall it's pretty ponderous. My brain hurts just thinking about the times we actually tried to play it. It helps if you have a GM who really knows and likes the system (go figure) and actually WANTS that level of complex, somewhat arbitrarily structured detail. Even so I found it excruciating when we ran combats or determined advancements. Give me BRP with its more elegant and consistently structured systems any day. I really like Shadow World (the RM "house" setting) though. And many of the modules for Middle Earth Roleplaying (which was sort of RM-Lite) were brilliant. Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Thu Dec 2 03:09:21 2004 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 16:09:21 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest Message-ID: >ASHLEY MUNDAY wrote: >> "Yeah Rolemaster was alot like RQ." >> >> Rolemaster was more like an accountant's DnD - it had >> levels, classes, huge FO spell lists, critical hit >> charts that made the Arduin Grimoire's look sane and a >> lovely paragraph format and writing style stolen from >> SPI. >> >> Add to that the avalanche of charts (you'd have to be >> eidetic to play it just off the character sheet) and >> you had a game that was almost totally unlike RQ. >> >> AND it was 5 times the price of Runequest in 1982... > >RM had a few cool ideas here and there, but overall it's pretty ponderous. > >My brain hurts just thinking about the times we actually tried to play >it. It helps if you have a GM who really knows and likes the system (go >figure) and actually WANTS that level of complex, somewhat arbitrarily >structured detail. > >Even so I found it excruciating when we ran combats or determined >advancements. Give me BRP with its more elegant and consistently >structured systems any day. Good god, you actually tried to play the full version?!? Despite wall themselves up behind mountains of books, every Rolemaster game I ever witnessed seemed to ignore all the complexity in favour of just generically saying "roll open ended d100, add relevant mods, get more than this to succeed". And passing round the books so everyone could snigger at the silly critical and fumble results, which were a real hoot... >I really like Shadow World (the RM "house" setting) though. And many of >the modules for Middle Earth Roleplaying (which was sort of RM-Lite) >were brilliant. I have a huge fondness for the Southern stuff: Far Harad, Greater Harad, The Forest of Tears etc. I never though MERP itself particular caught the feel of LotR but I loved the stuff they did "off map" as it were, would be a cracking setting for a Dark Sun like RQ powered game come to think of it... Cheers, Nick Middleton From bick10 at comcast.net Thu Dec 2 03:16:25 2004 From: bick10 at comcast.net (bick10 at comcast.net) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 16:16:25 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest Message-ID: <120120041616.13417.41ADEE590000B779000034692205886172CFCE050C070D@comcast.net> > Ash [snip] > charts that made the Arduin Grimoire's look sane and a > lovely paragraph format and writing style stolen from > SPI. Arduin Grimoire! Loved that. I?ll never forget rolling a fumble and tripping over an invisible turtle. > Add to that the avalanche of charts (you'd have to be > eidetic to play it just off the character sheet) and > you had a game that was almost totally unlike RQ. If you like charts, then it was fun. Yes, I agree it was slow to play and we never got more than one complete session in. Usually far too cumbersome. Jim From bick10 at comcast.net Thu Dec 2 03:33:31 2004 From: bick10 at comcast.net (bick10 at comcast.net) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 16:33:31 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 11, Issue 8 Message-ID: <120120041633.17440.41ADF25A000985DE000044202200750784CFCE050C070D@comcast.net> > --- ASHLEY MUNDAY wrote: > > > IIRC if a critter's got Fixed INT then it can't > > learn > > or cast magic*. Wouldn't surprise me if Yinkin had a > > ritual to awaken the intelligence of Alynx, but it'd > > probably only happen for advanced Initiates and > > runelords and priest. Seems like a good goal for the player. And a good way to help focus them where you want. > Paul Cardwell > Let's assume that IQ=INT. It doesn't really, but > there is a rough correlation between the two. As far as I am concerned, INT does Not equal IQ. It is much more than that. Level of reasoning, Spell memory capability, wit, puzzle solving? > INT can be fixed (as in RQ, Mythworld, and probably > most other games) and learning, etc. can still occur. > After all, if it can in the real world, it should be > in a fictional one which also adds magic. Fixed INT is animal intelligence, and that means no reasoning ability. Fixed INT can learn how to go through mazes, but that is a trick. Really clever Fixed INT can learn to apply tricks to new situations. What they can not do is grasp a brand new concept and expand on it. That is the gift of the standard and wakened INT. That ability is what allows the learning of magic. It is too complex for Fixed INT. However, that is my game. In your game you can have Fixed INT learn spells. But I would be very careful of the potential of abuse. There are the old stories of the Shadow Cat and it?s pet Orlanthi Rune Lord. Finally, there is a reason my player that gained a Shadow Cat himself never went to the extents to get it awakened. He did not want any stronger cult responsibilities (he saw them as restrictions) to hold him from doing what he wanted. He did make pretty good use of the shadow cat for cultural prestige. Jim From freyrvanic at earthlink.net Thu Dec 2 03:35:47 2004 From: freyrvanic at earthlink.net (Sven Lugar) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 08:35:47 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Pic of SCA-Steve. Message-ID: <410-220041231163547218@earthlink.net> Steve, I sent you the picture. Should I also post it to the photo's section as well, Kevin's pensive look & all? Sven ----- Original Message ----- From: To: freyrvanic at earthlink.net;RuneQuest rules discussion.;RuneQuest rules discussion. Cc: Sven Lugar Sent: 12/1/2004 6:51:13 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Pic of SCA-Steve. > BTW I dug up an old > picture of you from those days. Want me to scan it in & send it to you? > manga takk, > Sven Actually, if Steve gave his consent, I for one would like to see the Quester back in his old SCA days. Sort of, put a face to the game I so ejoy. From nphillis at shaw.ca Thu Dec 2 03:47:02 2004 From: nphillis at shaw.ca (Newton Philis) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 10:47:02 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest Message-ID: <21c87f221c33a7.21c33a721c87f2@shaw.ca> > [snip] > > charts that made the Arduin Grimoire's look sane and a > > lovely paragraph format and writing style stolen from > > SPI. > > Add to that the avalanche of charts (you'd have to be > > eidetic to play it just off the character sheet) and > > you had a game that was almost totally unlike RQ. > > > If you like charts, then it was fun. Yes, I agree it was slow to > play and we never got more than one complete session in. Usually > far too cumbersome. > > Jim Ended up playing a full-campaign with a DM who really liked the system. It has some very BAD points in practical play: - Very slow advancement for non-fighter types - The open ended roll caused many unbelievable results: I still remember running into a normal (mundane) bat who got VERY lucky (200+ result) and ended up hitting an artery in a low-level PCs arm: killed him in one fly-by attack! No thanks! - Magic was very underpowered (compared to fighter types): it took a mage about 3-5 rounds to get off a single energy bolt - which the enemy usually avoided/saved/etc. Meanwhile, your team mates had hacked off the heads and knees of 2-3 opponents in that time. - Character creation is still based on 'classes'. While the system does allow for any class to purchase any skill, the costs are so expensive to do so, everyone ends up just creating archtypes anyway. It does have some GOOD points in practical play: - The open-ended attack roles does add some randomness to combat (never predictable). One can never be assured of a victory against any opponent - even if you have superior Hit Points... From aescleal at btinternet.com Thu Dec 2 03:57:37 2004 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (ASHLEY MUNDAY) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 16:57:37 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 11, Issue 8 In-Reply-To: <20041201155208.26559.qmail@web51309.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041201165737.73501.qmail@web86205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Paul C. seems to have grabbed the wrong end of the stick. Where did you get the idea that Fixed INT of 5 is equal to a "normal" INT of 5? Read the creatures book again. Fixed INT creatures cannot learn or cast magic or learn or use knowledge skills. They can learn and use manipulation, agility, stealth and gawd knows what else, but they can't learn and use magic - of any kind. It'd be a bit pointless having a spell to convert Fixed INT to normal INT otherwise. "Go on oh mighty Waha, awaken the spirit of my Bison." "Granted!" says Waha. "Hang on a mo," the Bison rider asks, "What's the point of awakening my Bison, it does the same as it did before! Just moos and stamps about looking for plants and" "Beats me," says Waha, "I'm not allowed to know, great compromise and all that." As a side note, Fixed INT of 5 isn't equivalent Cheers, Ash --- Paul Cardwell wrote: > > --- ASHLEY MUNDAY wrote: > > > IIRC if a critter's got Fixed INT then it can't > > learn > > or cast magic*. Wouldn't surprise me if Yinkin had > a > > ritual to awaken the intelligence of Alynx, but > it'd > > probably only happen for advanced Initiates and > > runelords and priest. > > Let's assume that IQ=INT. It doesn't really, but > there is a rough correlation between the two. > > Are you contending that only IQ over 100 can learn > and > IQ 60 cannot? Granted, there is some limitation on > how much and/or how fast, but learning is possible > even among the under INT 6 species which can't cast > magic. > > INT can be fixed (as in RQ, Mythworld, and probably > most other games) and learning, etc. can still > occur. > After all, if it can in the real world, it should be > in a fictional one which also adds magic. > > Paul Cardwell > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > All your favorites on one personal page ? Try My > Yahoo! > http://my.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > From aescleal at btinternet.com Thu Dec 2 04:02:52 2004 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (ASHLEY MUNDAY) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 17:02:52 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 11, Issue 8 In-Reply-To: <20041201165737.73501.qmail@web86205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041201170252.93738.qmail@web86203.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Erk, that'll teach me to knock ctrl-z just before I send something and undo a load of edits. Mea culpa. Anyway, what Jim said on Fixed vs. Normal INT. Cheers, Ash --- ASHLEY MUNDAY wrote: > Paul C. seems to have grabbed the wrong end of the > stick. > > Where did you get the idea that Fixed INT of 5 is > equal to a "normal" INT of 5? Read the creatures > book > again. Fixed INT creatures cannot learn or cast > magic > or learn or use knowledge skills. They can learn and > use manipulation, agility, stealth and gawd knows > what > else, but they can't learn and use magic - of any > kind. > > It'd be a bit pointless having a spell to convert > Fixed INT to normal INT otherwise. > > "Go on oh mighty Waha, awaken the spirit of my > Bison." > > "Granted!" says Waha. > > "Hang on a mo," the Bison rider asks, "What's the > point of awakening my Bison, it does the same as it > did before! Just moos and stamps about looking for > plants and" > > "Beats me," says Waha, "I'm not allowed to know, > great > compromise and all that." > > As a side note, Fixed INT of 5 isn't equivalent > > Cheers, > > Ash > > --- Paul Cardwell wrote: > > > > --- ASHLEY MUNDAY wrote: > > > > > IIRC if a critter's got Fixed INT then it can't > > > learn > > > or cast magic*. Wouldn't surprise me if Yinkin > had > > a > > > ritual to awaken the intelligence of Alynx, but > > it'd > > > probably only happen for advanced Initiates and > > > runelords and priest. > > > > Let's assume that IQ=INT. It doesn't really, but > > there is a rough correlation between the two. > > > > Are you contending that only IQ over 100 can learn > > and > > IQ 60 cannot? Granted, there is some limitation > on > > how much and/or how fast, but learning is possible > > even among the under INT 6 species which can't > cast > > magic. > > > > INT can be fixed (as in RQ, Mythworld, and > probably > > most other games) and learning, etc. can still > > occur. > > After all, if it can in the real world, it should > be > > in a fictional one which also adds magic. > > > > Paul Cardwell > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > All your favorites on one personal page ? Try My > > Yahoo! > > http://my.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > > RQ-Rules mailing list > > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > > > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > From carpgachair at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 04:11:07 2004 From: carpgachair at yahoo.com (Paul Cardwell) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 09:11:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 11, Issue 8 In-Reply-To: <20041201165737.73501.qmail@web86205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041201171107.60672.qmail@web51303.mail.yahoo.com> I have RQ2 and RQ3 only in a pre-publication photocopy provided so I could referee the first public demo of RQ3 at Origins '84. The next day, I did the same for my Mythworld game system. Since then, I have mainly played Mythworld, which would have been RQ3 had Greg not prefered a less detailed (and thus less costly) system. Mythworld may be a minor desktop game, but it is still in print, and currently testplaying the first revision (mainly expansion) of the rules. I was intially attracted to RQ because of its inherent logic (as opposed to D&D's reliance on arbitrary charts and inherent illogic (slowly being weeded out in subsequent editions, but has a long way to go). I assumed this logic continued. Mythworld <6 INT critters can't cast magic, but they can learn general and natural weapon skills by experience and by training. This is intended as a clarification, not an attempt to start a flame war. Paul Cardwell --- ASHLEY MUNDAY wrote: > Paul C. seems to have grabbed the wrong end of the > stick. > > Where did you get the idea that Fixed INT of 5 is > equal to a "normal" INT of 5? Read the creatures > book > again. Fixed INT creatures cannot learn or cast > magic > or learn or use knowledge skills. They can learn and > use manipulation, agility, stealth and gawd knows > what > else, but they can't learn and use magic - of any > kind. > > It'd be a bit pointless having a spell to convert > Fixed INT to normal INT otherwise. > > "Go on oh mighty Waha, awaken the spirit of my > Bison." > > "Granted!" says Waha. > > "Hang on a mo," the Bison rider asks, "What's the > point of awakening my Bison, it does the same as it > did before! Just moos and stamps about looking for > plants and" > > "Beats me," says Waha, "I'm not allowed to know, > great > compromise and all that." > > As a side note, Fixed INT of 5 isn't equivalent > > Cheers, > > Ash > > --- Paul Cardwell wrote: > > > > --- ASHLEY MUNDAY wrote: > > > > > IIRC if a critter's got Fixed INT then it can't > > > learn > > > or cast magic*. Wouldn't surprise me if Yinkin > had > > a > > > ritual to awaken the intelligence of Alynx, but > > it'd > > > probably only happen for advanced Initiates and > > > runelords and priest. > > > > Let's assume that IQ=INT. It doesn't really, but > > there is a rough correlation between the two. > > > > Are you contending that only IQ over 100 can learn > > and > > IQ 60 cannot? Granted, there is some limitation > on > > how much and/or how fast, but learning is possible > > even among the under INT 6 species which can't > cast > > magic. > > > > INT can be fixed (as in RQ, Mythworld, and > probably > > most other games) and learning, etc. can still > > occur. > > After all, if it can in the real world, it should > be > > in a fictional one which also adds magic. > > > > Paul Cardwell > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > All your favorites on one personal page ? Try My > > Yahoo! > > http://my.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > > RQ-Rules mailing list > > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > > > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From grogthing at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 04:16:52 2004 From: grogthing at yahoo.com (grogthing) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 09:16:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041201171652.37614.qmail@web41525.mail.yahoo.com> Actually most of my RM playing experience was with MERP. I had all the RM books (mostly just so we could use the Spell Law and Arms/Claw Law as upgrades to MERP), and yeah if you use all the bits and parts of the full RM system, it was a beast. But the "Lite" version that came in MERP flowed well, and my group played it for years and loved it. Gregory --- Nick.Middleton at invensys.com wrote: > > >ASHLEY MUNDAY wrote: > >> "Yeah Rolemaster was alot like RQ." > >> > >> Rolemaster was more like an accountant's DnD - it > had > >> levels, classes, huge FO spell lists, critical > hit > >> charts that made the Arduin Grimoire's look sane > and a > >> lovely paragraph format and writing style stolen > from > >> SPI. > >> > >> Add to that the avalanche of charts (you'd have > to be > >> eidetic to play it just off the character sheet) > and > >> you had a game that was almost totally unlike RQ. > >> > >> AND it was 5 times the price of Runequest in > 1982... > > > >RM had a few cool ideas here and there, but overall > it's pretty ponderous. > > > >My brain hurts just thinking about the times we > actually tried to play > >it. It helps if you have a GM who really knows and > likes the system (go > >figure) and actually WANTS that level of complex, > somewhat arbitrarily > >structured detail. > > > >Even so I found it excruciating when we ran combats > or determined > >advancements. Give me BRP with its more elegant and > consistently > >structured systems any day. > > Good god, you actually tried to play the full > version?!? Despite wall > themselves up behind mountains of books, every > Rolemaster game I ever > witnessed seemed to ignore all the complexity in > favour of just generically > saying "roll open ended d100, add relevant mods, get > more than this to > succeed". > > And passing round the books so everyone could > snigger at the silly critical > and fumble results, which were a real hoot... > > >I really like Shadow World (the RM "house" setting) > though. And many of > >the modules for Middle Earth Roleplaying (which was > sort of RM-Lite) > >were brilliant. > > I have a huge fondness for the Southern stuff: Far > Harad, Greater Harad, > The Forest of Tears etc. I never though MERP itself > particular caught the > feel of LotR but I loved the stuff they did "off > map" as it were, would be > a cracking setting for a Dark Sun like RQ powered > game come to think of > it... > > Cheers, > > Nick Middleton > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > ===== "I have sworn, upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." - Thomas Jefferson "It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." - Thomas Jefferson "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" - Patrick Henry "A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious." - Aristotle __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From slposey at concentric.net Thu Dec 2 05:10:10 2004 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 10:10:10 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41AE0902.3070204@concentric.net> Nick.Middleton at invensys.com wrote: >>My brain hurts just thinking about the times we actually tried to play >>it. It helps if you have a GM who really knows and likes the system (go >>figure) and actually WANTS that level of complex, somewhat arbitrarily >>structured detail. >> >>Even so I found it excruciating when we ran combats or determined >>advancements. Give me BRP with its more elegant and consistently >>structured systems any day. > > Good god, you actually tried to play the full version?!? Despite wall > themselves up behind mountains of books, every Rolemaster game I ever > witnessed seemed to ignore all the complexity in favour of just generically > saying "roll open ended d100, add relevant mods, get more than this to > succeed". This GM had major portions of the Rulebooks and various supplements summarized for himself (he was like that). He'd created customized character sheets for various core classes; anyone who took a class that he didn't have one for on the first session got a customized sheet by the second session! Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From DevinC at aol.com Thu Dec 2 07:02:06 2004 From: DevinC at aol.com (DevinC at aol.com) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 15:02:06 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest Message-ID: <6BD90C21.268339F7.00047AF1@aol.com> Rolemaster, the supposedly more realistic game where I fell 60 ft out of a tree and survived with nary a scratch because I got lucky on my crit rolls? The game where, with the open ended tables in the later suuplements you could swing your sword in a showy display hitting nothing so well that everyone around you in a 60 ft radius could feint dead away at the sight of it? To my mind there are basically two necessary fantasy systems. D&D for the heroic novel-based approach, and RQ/BRP for the gritty more realistic approach. Anything else is basically twiddling in the wind. Devin From nphillis at shaw.ca Thu Dec 2 08:14:08 2004 From: nphillis at shaw.ca (Newton Philis) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 15:14:08 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest Message-ID: <2239b93223d723.223d7232239b93@shaw.ca> From: DevinC at aol.com > To my mind there are basically two necessary fantasy systems. D&D > for the heroic novel-based approach, and RQ/BRP for the gritty > more realistic approach. Anything else is basically twiddling in > the wind. > I have found that Harn-master has a very interesting system for gritty realism. I almost think of RQ as a 'Harn-master' lite version in some ways. From rico at ricosweb.com Thu Dec 2 10:28:15 2004 From: rico at ricosweb.com (Rich Allen) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 16:28:15 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest In-Reply-To: <6BD90C21.268339F7.00047AF1@aol.com> Message-ID: <2004121162815.544695@laptop> On Wed, 01 Dec 2004 15:02:06 -0500, DevinC at aol.com wrote: >?Rolemaster, the supposedly more realistic game where I fell 60 ft out of a tree and survived with nary a scratch because I got lucky on my crit rolls? When I was 11, I fell approximately 55 feet out of a tree, straight down onto grass, and only suffered a mildly sprained wrist. The doctor told my dad I was extremely lucky not to have shattered every bone in my body. I've heard of sky-divers surviving parachute malfunctions with relatively minor injuries. If you get lucky, you can survive some pretty hairy situations, and if you get unlucky you can get really hurt from some very mundane situations. As long as the frequency of *rare* outcomes stays rare I don't have a problem with it. Rich Allen From comogatas at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 12:24:15 2004 From: comogatas at yahoo.com (Eddy) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 17:24:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] completely off topic :) Message-ID: <20041202012415.46232.qmail@web40502.mail.yahoo.com> Rolemaster, AD&D, Runequest, throw in Harn and a couple others and you had the Burger Wars of rpgs back in the 80s. That was back when MERP represented the Lord of the Rings in role-playing. I can't understand how that property never got the treatment it deserved from an rpg. Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 15:29:05 +0000 (GMT) From: ASHLEY MUNDAY "Yeah Rolemaster was alot like RQ." Rolemaster was more like an accountant's DnD - it had levels, classes, huge FO spell lists, critical hit charts that made the Arduin Grimoire's look sane and a lovely paragraph format and writing style stolen from SPI. Add to that the avalanche of charts (you'd have to be eidetic to play it just off the character sheet) and you had a game that was almost totally unlike RQ. AND it was 5 times the price of Runequest in 1982... Cheers, Ash --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? All your favorites on one personal page ? Try My Yahoo! From steve at perrinworlds.com Thu Dec 2 15:02:49 2004 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 20:02:49 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Pic of SCA-Steve. References: <410-220041231163547218@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <015e01c4d824$13fe1f20$68417442@wizard> I don't want to spam the list with my visage but if there is some archive that photos can go to, feel free. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sven Lugar" To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 8:35 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Pic of SCA-Steve. > Steve, I sent you the picture. Should I also post it to the photo's section as well, Kevin's pensive look & all? > Sven > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: freyrvanic at earthlink.net;RuneQuest rules discussion.;RuneQuest rules discussion. > Cc: Sven Lugar > Sent: 12/1/2004 6:51:13 AM > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Pic of SCA-Steve. > > > > BTW I dug up an old > > picture of you from those days. Want me to scan it in & send it to you? > > manga takk, > > Sven > > Actually, if Steve gave his consent, I for one would like to see the Quester back in his old SCA days. Sort of, put a face to the game I so ejoy. > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > From freyrvanic at earthlink.net Thu Dec 2 15:29:45 2004 From: freyrvanic at earthlink.net (Sven Lugar) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 20:29:45 -0800 Subject: FW: Re: [RQ-Rules] Pic of SCA-Steve. Message-ID: <410-22004124242945453@earthlink.net> Hej nice moderator person, want to help me set that up?. I can send it to you as a jpeg or other format as you need. thanks, Sven Sven Lugar freyrvanic at earthlink.net homepage: http://home.earthlink.net/~freyrvanic/ > [Original Message] > From: Steve Perrin > To: ; RuneQuest rules discussion. > Date: 12/1/2004 8:07:38 PM > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Pic of SCA-Steve. > > I don't want to spam the list with my visage but if there is some archive > that photos can go to, feel free. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sven Lugar" > To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." > Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 8:35 AM > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Pic of SCA-Steve. > > > > Steve, I sent you the picture. Should I also post it to the photo's > section as well, Kevin's pensive look & all? > > Sven > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: > > To: freyrvanic at earthlink.net;RuneQuest rules discussion.;RuneQuest rules > discussion. > > Cc: Sven Lugar > > Sent: 12/1/2004 6:51:13 AM > > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Pic of SCA-Steve. > > > > > > > BTW I dug up an old > > > picture of you from those days. Want me to scan it in & send it to you? > > > manga takk, > > > Sven > > > > Actually, if Steve gave his consent, I for one would like to see the > Quester back in his old SCA days. Sort of, put a face to the game I so > ejoy. > > _______________________________________________ > > RQ-Rules mailing list > > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > > From katkin_kalvin at yahoo.com Thu Dec 2 18:13:23 2004 From: katkin_kalvin at yahoo.com (John Raner) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 23:13:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest In-Reply-To: <2004121162815.544695@laptop> Message-ID: <20041202071323.66854.qmail@web53704.mail.yahoo.com> --- Rich Allen wrote: > When I was 11, I fell approximately 55 feet out of a > tree, straight down onto grass, and only suffered a > mildly sprained wrist. The doctor told my dad I was > extremely lucky not to have shattered every bone in > my body. I've heard of sky-divers surviving > parachute malfunctions with relatively minor > injuries. If you get lucky, you can survive some > pretty hairy situations, and if you get unlucky you > can get really hurt from some very mundane > situations. As long as the frequency of *rare* > outcomes stays rare I don't have a problem with it. IIRC, the first man to successfully go over Niagra Falls in a barrel, went on to slip on a banana peel in New Zealand and die. Cheers, John ===== "Keep a government poor and weak and it's your servant; let it get rich and powerful and it's your master." ---- Colonel Andrew Jackson Hickok A state, is called the coldest of all cold monsters. Coldly lieth it also; and this lie creepeth from its mouth: "I, the state, am the people." ---- Friedrich Nietzsche "It is a shame that governments are chiefed by the devil tongues" ---- Chief Ten Bears "There is no such thing as an obsolete weapon or tool, merely obsolete thinking in its employ." ---- Mark D. (CapnCarp at yahoo.com) __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From lancelot at inetnebr.com Thu Dec 2 22:27:35 2004 From: lancelot at inetnebr.com (lance dyas) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 05:27:35 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Modeling the Extremes (was ) Determining success in RuneQuest In-Reply-To: <20041202071323.66854.qmail@web53704.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041202071323.66854.qmail@web53704.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41AEFC27.8070107@inetnebr.com> John Raner wrote: >--- Rich Allen wrote: > > >>When I was 11, I fell approximately 55 feet out of a >>tree, straight down onto grass, and only suffered a >>mildly sprained wrist. The doctor told my dad I was >>extremely lucky not to have shattered every bone in >>my body. I've heard of sky-divers surviving >>parachute malfunctions with relatively minor >>injuries. If you get lucky, you can survive some >>pretty hairy situations, and if you get unlucky you >>can get really hurt from some very mundane >>situations. >> yeah but do you reallly want to game those... Yeah my Rune Lord.died by falling into the toilet! that would be worth celebrating ... >> As long as the frequency of *rare* >>outcomes stays rare I don't have a problem with it. >> >> > >IIRC, the first man to successfully go over Niagra >Falls in a barrel, went on to slip on a banana peel in >New Zealand and die. > > I'm not sure the true extremes of "possibility" are any business being wedded to a die roll but that could be a genre issue or a prejudice on my part (ok I admit it) Wierdly the freak occurances can be realistic and feel un-real. I always liked RQs improved sense of control over D&D => RuneQuest was one of the first games that realy felt like it had active defensis and some realistic choices in conflict and also the freedom from "class" constraints was cool. -- Google Me at : Decision Driven Rolegaming -- Lance Dyas Destiny Diceless Roleplaying - at the Decision Driven Gaming Center http://www.dyasdesigns.com/roleplay/decision_driven.html From soltakss at yahoo.com Fri Dec 3 04:23:06 2004 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (Simon Phipp) Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 17:23:06 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Shadow Cats In-Reply-To: <20041201130213.04F7E22278D@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: <20041202172306.93773.qmail@web51006.mail.yahoo.com> Only 8 Issues in Volume 11 - is this a record? Maybe I blinked and missed something. Ian 'Earl' Martin: > One of my players has just been initiated into the Odayla and Yinkin > cult as of the cult right up in TorRM#18, as such I rolled up a shadow > cat for him, and he found it during his initiation ceremony. The > question I expect to follow soon is since a shadow cat has good POW and > a fixed INT of 5 can it cast spirit magic spells? If it can, how are > they taught it it? Normal Shadow Cats are Fixed INT and so are not actually intelligent. The Fixed INT really shows how cunning they are and I play that they can hold that many commands at once. To allow them to use magic they must have normal INT. This can be done in all kinds of ways: 1. Become a sorcerer and create a familiar (losing INT in the process - or POW if you are using girly rules) 2. Awaken the Shadow Cat as an allied spirit (normally for Rune Levels only) 3. Awaken the Shadow Cat using some weird spell (Griffin Island has a spell to awaken Giant Hawk INT and there is no reason why other cults can't have something similar) 4. Get a Shadow Cat as a result of a HeroQuest (maybe it will be intelligent, maybe just a pain in the backside, depends on whether the GM was in a good mood or not) 5. Be lucky and find one of the few truly intelligent Shadow Cats that naturally occur 6. Find a Shadow Cat that is the child of a WereCat or a Shadow Cat demigod (daimon in HeroQuest terms) It sounds as though 4 might apply here, but he could just be lucky and have a truly intelligent one. In any case, (1) means the Shadow Cat has its Fixed INT + Number of Points of INT (or POW in the girly rules) expended by the sorcerer, so it will be a fairly stupid cat, (2)-(5) normally give INT 3D6, or 2D6+6 if you are feeling generous and (6) may have a higher INT of 4D6 or 3D6+6, say. Oh, and the same applies to other animals, too. In RQ2 there was no such thing as Fixed INT, so things were intelligent or not. RQ3 is probably better in this regard. If you have an intelligent Shadow Cat and it joins Yinkin then it can sacrifice for Yinkin Rune Spells, which can be fun, and even become an acolyte or priest. Then it could ally the human PC .... See Ya Simon PS Now, should I just include the rest of the Issue after my email to fill up the Issue? (like SOME people ....:-( ) ___________________________________________________________ ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Sat Dec 4 01:27:57 2004 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 14:27:57 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Dodge and Parry In-Reply-To: <41AC74CB.9000801@inetnebr.com> Message-ID: Sorry if my comment seemed a bit arrogant (I was in a hurry when I wrote it.) I totally agree that there are more than one way to realism both by what rulesystem you use and what part of reality you want to emphatize. I'm not sure wether you really want to be bothered with the level of detail in my houserules, but I'll give you a glimpse, just so you can see my line of argument: I keep the combat system as it is in RQ3, as I've comed to the concltion that my attempts at improving it isn't worht it. I think one parry action evens out one attack is the most realistic, as an attack and a parry takes aproxemately the same time. A dodge is an evasive action that takes you away from the attacker. Provided that you make the roll, any swing (i.e attacks) by the opponent will fail as you're out of range. I've added some ways of attacking earlier in the round by sacrifying damage potential. This is realistic, as it's perfectly possible to stab 5 times in 2 seconds provided that you not do full force attacks. I've allso split the type of damage into cutting, piercing and bashing, and split the armor values of armour so that they have one armorvalue for each of those three. That's allso realistic, as a dagger can easily stab through a gamberson, while a stick will be virually useless, etc. >From: lance dyas >Reply-To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." >To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." >Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Dodge and Parry >Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 07:25:31 -0600 > >Bjorn Stolen wrote: > >>>However, in SPQR, I specifically say that dodges or parries may be used >>>against any and all attacks. Just as in the old RQ I said that an >>>"attack" >>>was actually a flurry of blows attempting to set up the target for the >>>one >>>that gets through, I work on the theory that a parry or dodge covers all >>>incoming attacks. In fact, I don't differentiate between the two actions >>>very well because I have been ignoring damage to parrying equipment, >>>which I >>>intend to change after some recent experience in playtesting another >>>game. >> >> >>Well, I don't like you wiew, as I find it too unrealistic. > > >Unless the Action is dolled out in 1 second increments or less like GURPS >visualising >it as one strike and one parry in real world terms is unrealistic > >Actually you dont like it's event density or actually lack there of.... >using an attack and a defense as an entire battle could be another valid >option. >which you wouldn't like either.;-) and the results could be either >realistic or not. > >These mechanics also do not aid in higher detailed results you prefer ( >Note >the gm and players could still describe the action with great details) > >Separating combat skill into defense and attack is not necessarily >realistic either as good >defenses act to give you better openings to attack and good attacks can >interupt >your opponents atttacks thereby acting as a defense.... there is no hard >line. > >>But I will not start to dispute your rules as Ihave no problem with you >>playing RPG's the way you like. Prioritizing between realism and >>playability; it's an eternal dilemma, and those of you who have bothered >>with scanning through my houserules will know that I'm a detail > >well the detail orientation is noteable from your comments. but without >further info realism is not even on the table. > >>and realism-freak! >> >>_________________________________________________________________ >>Last ned MSN Messenger gratis http://www.msn.no/computing/messenger - Den >>korteste veien mellom deg og dine venner >> >>_______________________________________________ >>RQ-Rules mailing list >>RQ-Rules at crashbox.com >>http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules >>http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules >> >>. >> > > >-- >Google Me at : Decision Driven Rolegaming > >-- Lance Dyas >Destiny Diceless Roleplaying - at the Decision Driven Gaming Center >http://www.dyasdesigns.com/roleplay/decision_driven.html > > >_______________________________________________ >RQ-Rules mailing list >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com >http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules >http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules _________________________________________________________________ MSN Hotmail http://www.hotmail.com Med markedets beste SPAM-filter. Gratis! From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Sat Dec 4 01:39:54 2004 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 14:39:54 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Getting out of Dodge In-Reply-To: <49B7B1B6-434A-11D9-AE14-000D9334A9EA@incentre.net> Message-ID: You're right. I actually considered discarding the Dodge all togheter until I realized that the dodge counters all attacks by one attacker! I'm a Norwegian, english is not my mothertounge, and reading rules in english when I was 12 - 13 years old was kind of difficult ;) In my eyes and according to my experience with fencing I totally agree that parrying, attacking and dodging is mixed together. When I define a RQ3-dodge to be a total evasive action, I do so to make the action fit with the bonuses given by the rules. If you attacked first in a round, it's perfectly possible to jump out afterwards, and if you're forced to dodge first in the round, but want to attack later in the round, you can just asume that you back off, while having an eager opponent coming after you; and when you deem it's time, you simply stop dodging, and couterstrike. Thus, I feel that my way of defining dodge in RQ3 is the best way of explaining why the dodge works as it does in RQ3. >From: Tom Cantine >Reply-To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." >To: rq-rules at crashbox.com >Subject: [RQ-Rules] Getting out of Dodge >Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 20:37:12 -0700 > >> >Bjorn rebutted thusly: > >> >>>(I don't actually read it as putting the dodger out of reach necessarily, >>>just out of the actual lines of attack.) >> >>Well, I do. Only stepping out of the line of attack (-or stepping of the >>line as we call it in WMA) takes at least as long time as it takes to >>attack. Therefore there would be no realistic reason why a dodge should >>count for all attacks done by one attacker. In that case, the >>dodge-ability >>would from a tactical point of wiew be pointless, since a dodge have the >>potential of damaging the attacking weapon. >> >>If you rule a dodge as "getting the ***** out of Dodge"- as I do; one >>could >>say that it's realistic with a dodge beeing able to cope with all attacks >>done by one attacker, as you're effectively running/jumping away that >>round. >>Stepping of the line is in my head integrated in the parry-action as it's >>an >>integrated part of making parry-reposts and in defencive techniques >>dedicated to deck incoming attackers. >> > >All right, but bear in mind that one can combine a Dodge with an Attack >action. If Dodge means putting oneself out of range of all attacks, rather >than simply avoiding all attempts that would otherwise have hit, then you >have to assume the character somehow also scoots back into range to attack. > >I don't mean your interpretation is inadmissible, and it is probably very >appropriate for many cases. Only that it is not necessary, and probably >should not be applied in many (even most) instances. > >_______________________________________________ >RQ-Rules mailing list >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com >http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules >http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules _________________________________________________________________ MSN Hotmail http://www.hotmail.com Med markedets beste SPAM-filter. Gratis! From Unseenlibrarian at aol.com Sat Dec 4 03:44:47 2004 From: Unseenlibrarian at aol.com (Unseenlibrarian at aol.com) Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 11:44:47 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] Magic Book problem. Message-ID: <66.4b8bb9a0.2ee1f1ff@aol.com> I decided to get my Runequest III books out and revive my old Connecticut Vikings on Griffin Island game, only to recall why I'd put it on hiatus in the first place: I'm apparently missing pages 57-58 of the magic book, with all the descriptions of the Enchantments and the player notes on rituals. Could someone possibly summarize the information there? For that matter, is there anything else on those pages that I've forgotten? Thank you for any help. Phil From jurrubin at earthlink.net Sat Dec 4 03:56:45 2004 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 10:56:45 -0600 (GMT-06:00) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Magic Book problem. Message-ID: <17577848.1102093005810.JavaMail.root@louie.psp.pas.earthlink.net> Phil, I'll be happy to scan in those pages and email them to you this weekend, if you don't get them sooner. Just email me what address you want me to send them to. I'll scan them in as hires .jpg files and zip them. David Smart jurrubin at earthlink.net -----Original Message----- From: Unseenlibrarian at aol.com Sent: Dec 3, 2004 10:44 AM To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: [RQ-Rules] Magic Book problem. I decided to get my Runequest III books out and revive my old Connecticut Vikings on Griffin Island game, only to recall why I'd put it on hiatus in the first place: I'm apparently missing pages 57-58 of the magic book, with all the descriptions of the Enchantments and the player notes on rituals. Could someone possibly summarize the information there? For that matter, is there anything else on those pages that I've forgotten? Thank you for any help. Phil _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules From leonbk at yahoo.com Sat Dec 4 04:59:53 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 09:59:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Magic Book problem. In-Reply-To: <66.4b8bb9a0.2ee1f1ff@aol.com> Message-ID: <20041203175953.31445.qmail@web41110.mail.yahoo.com> Well, this may not be exactly what you are looking for, but take a look anyway: http://www.godlearner.d2g.com/Spirit/ Leon --- Unseenlibrarian at aol.com wrote: > I decided to get my Runequest III books out and > revive my old Connecticut > Vikings on Griffin Island game, only to recall why > I'd put it on hiatus in the > first place: I'm apparently missing pages 57-58 of > the magic book, with all the > descriptions of the Enchantments and the player > notes on rituals. Could > someone possibly summarize the information there? > For that matter, is there anything > else on those pages that I've forgotten? > > Thank you for any help. > > Phil > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Jazz up your holiday email with celebrity designs. Learn more. http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com From jurrubin at earthlink.net Sat Dec 4 05:29:51 2004 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:29:51 -0600 (GMT-06:00) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Magic Book problem. Message-ID: <24257107.1102098591742.JavaMail.root@daisy.psp.pas.earthlink.net> And a truly awesome database/website you have, Leon. It's really enhanced my campaign. Thank you for all your hard work! David Smart -----Original Message----- From: Leon Kirshtein Sent: Dec 3, 2004 11:59 AM To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Magic Book problem. Well, this may not be exactly what you are looking for, but take a look anyway: http://www.godlearner.d2g.com/Spirit/ Leon From gkahla at chromebob.com Sat Dec 4 11:16:08 2004 From: gkahla at chromebob.com (Gerall Kahla) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 18:16:08 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Magic Book problem. In-Reply-To: <20041203175953.31445.qmail@web41110.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041203175953.31445.qmail@web41110.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41B101C8.4060104@chromebob.com> Leon Kirshtein wrote: > Well, this may not be exactly what you are looking > for, but take a look anyway: > > http://www.godlearner.d2g.com/Spirit/ is it just me, or is this link borken? i'd love to see a database-driven RPG content site! -- Gerall Kahla / gkahla / autom4tic / the Celestial Mechanic [http://chromebob.com/] From jurrubin at earthlink.net Sat Dec 4 14:18:55 2004 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (D. Smart) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 21:18:55 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Magic Book problem. In-Reply-To: <41B101C8.4060104@chromebob.com> References: <20041203175953.31445.qmail@web41110.mail.yahoo.com> <41B101C8.4060104@chromebob.com> Message-ID: <41B12C9F.7080702@earthlink.net> It worked for me earlier this afternoon but it looks like the d2g.com server is down now. David Gerall Kahla wrote: > > > Leon Kirshtein wrote: > >> Well, this may not be exactly what you are looking >> for, but take a look anyway: >> >> http://www.godlearner.d2g.com/Spirit/ > > > is it just me, or is this link borken? > > i'd love to see a database-driven RPG content site! > From tcantine at incentre.net Sat Dec 4 15:27:23 2004 From: tcantine at incentre.net (Tom Cantine) Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 21:27:23 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: Getting out of Dodge and Interpreting Strike Ranks In-Reply-To: <20041203144037.38C3C222730@boomstick.screwheads.net> References: <20041203144037.38C3C222730@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: Remember that Strike Ranks are only approximately equivalent to a unit of time. For things like shooting arrows or casting spells, they correspond very closely to sequential timestamps, but they don't match up so well for melee generally. I interpret a lower strike rank as not necessarily attacking FIRST, but having a statistical advantage owing to speed, reach, etc. OFTEN, but not always, that will translate into physically attacking before the other guy has a chance. But in a situation where, say, you have two roughly equal fighters (say 50% attack each) but one rolls on SR6 and the other on SR7, they may both be equally skilled, but the other has a slight edge, and is slightly likelier to prevail. If he rolls first and hits, his hit can pre-empt the other guy's roll. This doesn't mean the other guy didn't actually ATTACK; it just means that all the swings he made failed to connect; it's as if he simply failed his attack roll. The actual "hit" may have come anywhere in the 12 second melee round. The Strike Ranks are just a way of reflecting that some events are likelier to preclude others. Think of it in reverse. If the first guy misses his attack roll and the second guy hits, it's not that the first guy necessarily swung and missed once; he just may not have been able to find an opening before being hit himself. Or if the first guy hit, but the second parried and then missed his own attack, it needn't be parsed out as hit-parry-miss; it could be that the first guy was unable to find an opening because he was too busy defending himself. > Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 14:39:54 +0000 > From: "Bjorn Stolen" > Subject: RE: [RQ-Rules] Getting out of Dodge > To: rq-rules at crashbox.com > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed > > You're right. I actually considered discarding the Dodge all togheter > until > I realized that the dodge counters all attacks by one attacker! I'm a > Norwegian, english is not my mothertounge, and reading rules in > english when > I was 12 - 13 years old was kind of difficult ;) In my eyes and > according > to my experience with fencing I totally agree that parrying, attacking > and > dodging is mixed together. > > When I define a RQ3-dodge to be a total evasive action, I do so to > make the > action fit with the bonuses given by the rules. If you attacked first > in a > round, it's perfectly possible to jump out afterwards, and if you're > forced > to dodge first in the round, but want to attack later in the round, > you can > just asume that you back off, while having an eager opponent coming > after > you; and when you deem it's time, you simply stop dodging, and > couterstrike. > Thus, I feel that my way of defining dodge in RQ3 is the best way of > explaining why the dodge works as it does in RQ3. > >> From: Tom Cantine >> Reply-To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." >> To: rq-rules at crashbox.com >> Subject: [RQ-Rules] Getting out of Dodge >> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 20:37:12 -0700 >> >>> >> Bjorn rebutted thusly: >> >>> >>>> (I don't actually read it as putting the dodger out of reach >>>> necessarily, >>>> just out of the actual lines of attack.) >>> >>> Well, I do. Only stepping out of the line of attack (-or stepping of >>> the >>> line as we call it in WMA) takes at least as long time as it takes to >>> attack. Therefore there would be no realistic reason why a dodge >>> should >>> count for all attacks done by one attacker. In that case, the >>> dodge-ability >>> would from a tactical point of wiew be pointless, since a dodge have >>> the >>> potential of damaging the attacking weapon. >>> >>> If you rule a dodge as "getting the ***** out of Dodge"- as I do; one >>> could >>> say that it's realistic with a dodge beeing able to cope with all >>> attacks >>> done by one attacker, as you're effectively running/jumping away that >>> round. >>> Stepping of the line is in my head integrated in the parry-action as >>> it's >>> an >>> integrated part of making parry-reposts and in defencive techniques >>> dedicated to deck incoming attackers. >>> >> >> All right, but bear in mind that one can combine a Dodge with an >> Attack >> action. If Dodge means putting oneself out of range of all attacks, >> rather >> than simply avoiding all attempts that would otherwise have hit, then >> you >> have to assume the character somehow also scoots back into range to >> attack. >> >> I don't mean your interpretation is inadmissible, and it is probably >> very >> appropriate for many cases. Only that it is not necessary, and >> probably >> should not be applied in many (even most) instances. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> RQ-Rules mailing list >> RQ-Rules at crashbox.com >> http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules >> http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > > _________________________________________________________________ > MSN Hotmail http://www.hotmail.com Med markedets beste SPAM-filter. > Gratis! > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > > > End of RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 12, Issue 4 > *************************************** > From steve at perrinworlds.com Mon Dec 6 11:02:33 2004 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 16:02:33 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest References: <12329289.1101862349892.JavaMail.root@fozzie.psp.pas.earthlink.net> <23596.65.70.252.73.1101914227.squirrel@65.70.252.73> Message-ID: <013801c4db27$01899da0$68417442@wizard> I have been following up sending the rules to people with sending them a character creation spreadsheet done by Dave Berge, one of my playtesters who is more of an Excel guru than I am. If anyone got the rules but hasn't gotten the spreadsheet, let me know off list and I'll send you the spreadsheet. Steve Perrin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gerall Kahla" To: "David Smart" ; "RuneQuest rules discussion." Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 7:17 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest > > --- Steve Perrin wrote: > > > > Actually, I used a kind of degree of success roll, > > subtracting in standard > > BRP style, for my Black 9 Ops rules. > > > > If anyone would like a copy of the rules, let me > > know. > > may i get a copy of these rules, as well? thanks for offering! > > -- > be warned, fair traveller; there are no maps for these territories. > Gerall Kahla / gkahla / autom4tic > [http://chromebob.com/] > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Mon Dec 6 19:57:49 2004 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 08:57:49 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Magic Book problem. Message-ID: >I decided to get my Runequest III books out and revive my old Connecticut >Vikings on Griffin Island game, only to recall why I'd put it on hiatus in the >first place: I'm apparently missing pages 57-58 of the magic book, with all the >descriptions of the Enchantments and the player notes on rituals. Could >someone possibly summarize the information there? For that matter, is there anything >else on those pages that I've forgotten? > The whole thing is available from Chaosium as the Basic Role Playing Magic Book monograph as well btw... as is the Players Book and the Creatures Book. I normally have multiple copies of the Players Book and the Magic Book around when an RQ game is in progress as if any players need to look stuff up it'll almost certainly be in those. Cheers, Nick Middleton From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Mon Dec 6 20:06:34 2004 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 09:06:34 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Magic Book problem. Message-ID: >Leon Kirshtein wrote: >> Well, this may not be exactly what you are looking >> for, but take a look anyway: >> >> http://www.godlearner.d2g.com/Spirit/ > >is it just me, or is this link borken? > >i'd love to see a database-driven RPG content site! > Leon's site is excellent in general, and the database is awesome - it's only flaw is that the site has seemed over the last couple of years that I have been aware of it, a tad pernickety about connections. Specifically, it has always seemed to react badly to my Work's internet connection settings (something about Port conflicts I think, but I am there flailing around well beyond the limits of my understanding...), so I just access it from home, from where it's been far more reliable. Cheers, Nick Middleton From leonbk at yahoo.com Tue Dec 7 01:53:41 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 06:53:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Magic Book problem. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041206145341.10189.qmail@web41122.mail.yahoo.com> > >Leon Kirshtein wrote: > >> Well, this may not be exactly what you are > looking > >> for, but take a look anyway: > >> > >> http://www.godlearner.d2g.com/Spirit/ > > > >is it just me, or is this link borken? > > > >i'd love to see a database-driven RPG content site! > > > > Leon's site is excellent in general, and the > database is awesome - it's > only flaw is that the site has seemed over the last > couple of years that I > have been aware of it, a tad pernickety about > connections. Specifically, it > has always seemed to react badly to my Work's > internet connection settings > (something about Port conflicts I think, but I am > there flailing around > well beyond the limits of my understanding...), so I > just access it from > home, from where it's been far more reliable. > > Cheers, > > Nick Middleton Thanks for the review. The problems are based on the need to use a different port on my server/router combination and it seems most corporate firewalls do not like to be redirected to a different port. I am considering putting the database contents up on the site as several pdf files, but the downside is that the file would not be up to date with any additions or changes made untill the new file is created. BTW, the list of spells and skills are not complete, if you see something missing please send it to me and I will add it to the database. I am also thinking of adding a monster section to the database (once I find some time). That do you guys think about that? ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From peter.brink at brinkdata.se Tue Dec 7 02:10:40 2004 From: peter.brink at brinkdata.se (Peter Brink) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 16:10:40 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Magic Book problem. In-Reply-To: <20041206145341.10189.qmail@web41122.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041206145341.10189.qmail@web41122.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41B47670.7040401@brinkdata.se> Leon Kirshtein skrev: > > I am considering putting the database contents up on > the site as several pdf files, but the downside is > that the file would not be up to date with any > additions or changes made untill the new file is > created. > Well, most of the time a resource such as this is best used offline, when playing the game, so a neat feature would be to be able to query the DB and have the result printed to a html page which one then could save for offline viewing or printing. /Peter Brink From leonbk at yahoo.com Tue Dec 7 02:18:54 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 07:18:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Magic Book problem. In-Reply-To: <41B47670.7040401@brinkdata.se> Message-ID: <20041206151854.27634.qmail@web41114.mail.yahoo.com> --- Peter Brink wrote: > Leon Kirshtein skrev: > > > > I am considering putting the database contents up > on > > the site as several pdf files, but the downside is > > that the file would not be up to date with any > > additions or changes made untill the new file is > > created. > > > > Well, most of the time a resource such as this is > best used offline, > when playing the game, so a neat feature would be to > be able to query > the DB and have the result printed to a html page > which one then could > save for offline viewing or printing. Getting all of the items on one html page may be a problem for my server (I am using an old desk top for this, which is running the SQL Server as well). I'll run some tests and see what the perfomance issues I encounter with this. ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From gkahla at chromebob.com Tue Dec 7 02:21:53 2004 From: gkahla at chromebob.com (Gerall Kahla) Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 09:21:53 -0600 (CST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Magic Book problem. In-Reply-To: <20041206145341.10189.qmail@web41122.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041206145341.10189.qmail@web41122.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <36061.65.70.252.73.1102346513.squirrel@65.70.252.73> [snip] > I am considering putting the database contents up on > the site as several pdf files, but the downside is > that the file would not be up to date with any > additions or changes made untill the new file is > created. that wouldn't be a real problem (for me at least) simply because if the individual things you need aren't in the PDF, you can find them and print them before play. > BTW, the list of spells and skills are not complete, > if you see something missing please send it to me and > I will add it to the database. hmmm... what format? HTML? > I am also thinking of adding a monster section to the > database (once I find some time). That do you guys > think about that? excellent idea! i've started a list of species on my site here: http://chromebob.com/species - with a little tweaking, i could re-organize them to straight RQ3 instead of using my house rules... contact me off-list if you'd like copies of my monsters. after that, the next step would be a Character Server that holds NPC / PC character sheets in MySQL. need a gang of broo? print out broo #'s 3 thru 8. play. want to see what your character was like three games ago? pull his records from that time. i'm actually working on this idea right now for my site. the differences in the base RQ3 system and my variant are subtle enough that we could probably have characters defined as attributes and skills, then have the webserver calculate the derived attributes as it serves the pages... hmmm... any other web-head programmer types interested in this: email me. we'll see what develops! -- be warned, fair traveller; there are no maps for these territories. Gerall Kahla / gkahla / autom4tic [http://chromebob.com/] From jurrubin at earthlink.net Tue Dec 7 03:06:09 2004 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 10:06:09 -0600 (GMT-06:00) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Magic Book problem. Message-ID: <26499506.1102349169017.JavaMail.root@ernie.psp.pas.earthlink.net> A critters DB would be great! Would it be possible to include a graphic with each one of the more esoteric monsters? In table-top RPGing, a picture can really be worth a thousand words and help keep the action moving. Even a black and white .gif that's zipped would be useful. As a side note for the list, I've been able to discover some really decent color pics on various monsters by using Google's graphics search page then browsing the resulting web pages. Single key words such as "manticore", "sorcerer", "chimera", etc. seem to work best. Just be sure the browser "adult" filter is activated (or maybe not, depending on one's preference). Either way, such searches from work/school are not advisable. David -----Original Message----- From: Leon Kirshtein Sent: Dec 6, 2004 8:53 AM To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Magic Book problem. I am also thinking of adding a monster section to the database (once I find some time). That do you guys think about that? From leonbk at yahoo.com Tue Dec 7 03:10:11 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 08:10:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Magic Book problem. In-Reply-To: <36061.65.70.252.73.1102346513.squirrel@65.70.252.73> Message-ID: <20041206161011.40988.qmail@web41129.mail.yahoo.com> --- Gerall Kahla wrote: > > BTW, the list of spells and skills are not > complete, > > if you see something missing please send it to me > and > > I will add it to the database. > > hmmm... what format? HTML? Send it as text or excel. I will copy/paste it in. > > I am also thinking of adding a monster section to > the > > database (once I find some time). That do you > guys > > think about that? > > excellent idea! i've started a list of species on > my site here: > > http://chromebob.com/species - with a little > tweaking, i could re-organize > them to straight RQ3 instead of using my house > rules... contact me > off-list if you'd like copies of my monsters. Love to get them. Text or Excel would be the best way for me. > after that, the next step would be a Character > Server that holds NPC / PC character sheets in > MySQL. Do not store character sheets. Its a pain to deal with and a pain to find what you need. ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From leonbk at yahoo.com Tue Dec 7 03:15:55 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 08:15:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Magic Book problem. In-Reply-To: <26499506.1102349169017.JavaMail.root@ernie.psp.pas.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20041206161555.28022.qmail@web41105.mail.yahoo.com> --- David Smart wrote: > A critters DB would be great! Would it be possible > to include a graphic with each one of the more > esoteric monsters? In table-top RPGing, a picture > can really be worth a thousand words and help keep > the action moving. Even a black and white .gif > that's zipped would be useful. It would not be a problem. I started doing that with the magic items, check that out. The problem is the time. To do something like this I would need someone to put together all the information in a particular form, so I can upload it to the database in one shot. This way I can concentarate on the front end stuff. This is the main reason why the skills and the magic items sections are only 60% and 10% filled out. ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za Tue Dec 7 21:22:37 2004 From: Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za (Den, Tony T) Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 12:22:37 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest Message-ID: <52B26EB23446704C801FCF722CF8D2060578F21E@scmbjhbmsg03.scmbdirectory.com> Newton Philis wrote > I have found that Harn-master has a very interesting system for gritty realism. I almost think of RQ as a 'Harn-master' lite version in some ways. My group has recently been playing harnmaster and yes, much as I hate to admit, it does have some decent ideas and realisms. Whats quite nice is teh who fumble/crit is not a straight high or low roll. __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Standard Bank Disclaimer and Confidentiality Note This e-mail, its attachments and any rights attaching hereto are, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, the property of Standard Bank Group Limited and/or its subsidiaries ("the Group"). It is confidential, private and intended for the addressee only. Should you not be the addressee and receive this e-mail by mistake, kindly notify the sender, and delete this e-mail, immediately and do not disclose or use same in any manner whatsoever. Views and opinions expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender unless clearly stated as those of the Group. The Group accepts no liability whatsoever for any loss or damages whatsoever and howsoever incurred, or suffered, resulting, or arising, from the use of this email or its attachments. The Group does not warrant the integrity of this e-mail nor that it is free of errors, viruses, interception or interference. Licensed divisions of the Standard Bank Group are authorised financial services providers in terms of the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act, No 37 of 2002 (FAIS). For information about the Standard Bank Group Limited visit our website http://www.standardbank.co.za ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From soltakss at yahoo.com Mon Dec 13 07:26:35 2004 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (Simon Phipp) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 20:26:35 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Fwd: [rqaddicts] Digest Number 306 Message-ID: <20041212202635.96794.qmail@web51009.mail.yahoo.com> >From the RQAddicts site: --- rqaddicts at yahoogroups.com wrote: > Message: 1 > Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 23:38:06 +0000 (GMT) > From: Jamie O'Shaughnessy > Subject: Mass RuneQuest Sell Off > > > http://search.ebay.co.uk/_W0QQgotopageZ1QQsassZjoshaughQ5fukQQsorecordsperpageZ25QQsosortorderZ1QQsosortpropertyZ1 > > It's time for me to move on, literally - I'm moving abroad and need to sell > off > my beloved collection of Runequest items. See my auctions on eBay > (joshaugh_uk) > for a lot of stuff, some unusual, some in amazing condition. Would much > rather > this all go to a great home where it is appreciated. > > Happy gaming, > Jamie > > ___________________________________________________________ Win a castle for NYE with your mates and Yahoo! Messenger http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From mattley at gmail.com Sat Dec 18 11:58:47 2004 From: mattley at gmail.com (Matt Conrad) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 16:58:47 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] 2-handed weapons--gack! Message-ID: Does anyone else think the 2-handed weapons are overpowered for RQ? We had been playing a nice little campaign when all the players got themselves killed. We came up with a new setting and I, perhaps foolishly, agreed to amp up the power levels a bit. We had been playing guys with mostly cuirboulli armor (3), short swords or spears, primary weapon in the 50s or 60s. The new guys are wearing bezainted or ringmail (4 or 5), primary weapon in the 50s-70s, somewhat better spells. The problem is I let the guys pick whatever they wanted off the weapons list, and immediately one of the players picked the poleaxe (base 3d6) and another picked the giant hammer (base 2d6+2). (FYI, I have two other players, much less inclined to combat maximization.) I hadn't really thought it out beforehand, but these things are just monstrously deadly. With damage bonus, on an *average* hit, no Bladesharps, we're looking at 12 or so points of damage. Somebody wearing ringmail will go down at a single blow. On a better than average roll, or with a few points of Bladesharp, even someone with plate will go down at one hit. Does anyone else find this out of sync? If so, how did you deal with it? Matt From jurrubin at earthlink.net Sat Dec 18 13:21:16 2004 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (D. Smart) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 20:21:16 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] 2-handed weapons--gack! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41C3941C.5000809@earthlink.net> Heh. I just have an NPC make his Dodge, get in under that nice long weapon, then filet the polearm wielder with a Firebladed shortsword or dagger. David Matt Conrad wrote: >Does anyone else think the 2-handed weapons are overpowered for RQ? > > From gkahla at chromebob.com Sun Dec 19 01:06:00 2004 From: gkahla at chromebob.com (Gerall Kahla) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 08:06:00 -0600 (CST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] 2-handed weapons--gack! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <51620.65.70.252.73.1103378760.squirrel@65.70.252.73> > Does anyone else think the 2-handed weapons are overpowered for RQ? they pretty well reflect the reality of cutting through armor, IMHO... [snip] > The problem is I let the guys pick whatever they wanted off the > weapons list, and immediately one of the players picked the poleaxe > (base 3d6) and another picked the giant hammer (base 2d6+2). (FYI, I > have two other players, much less inclined to combat maximization.) got some min/max'ers in your group, eh? hmmm... > I hadn't really thought it out beforehand, but these things are just > monstrously deadly. With damage bonus, on an *average* hit, no > Bladesharps, we're looking at 12 or so points of damage. Somebody > wearing ringmail will go down at a single blow. On a better than > average roll, or with a few points of Bladesharp, even someone with > plate will go down at one hit. this is true. > Does anyone else find this out of sync? If so, how did you deal with it? when i had to deal with it, (i don't anymore - my group are definitely *not* min/max fiends) i simply remembered to make my NPCs notice and react to those weapons. you can't carry a poleaxe concealed. people see these things. so, people with large 2-handed weapons typically got targetted by any incoming missile fire first. remember; if even one arm goes to 0 or fewer HP they can't wield a 2-handed weapon! in a game i played in, the PCs developed a strategy. during the first available declaration we'd all focus Disrupt. on the 3rd round of fighting, the fastest of us would pick the largest target (or the target with the 2-handed weapon) and (for a free action) yell out the target. everyone then Disrupted the Minotaur, or the rhomphia-wielding sargeant, or whomever. the only problem with this was the referee decided that the Lunar troops targetted by this barrage would learn the trick themselves. an arms race ensued. however, it taught us the lesson that the person who swings the biggest stick is probably also the person with the least defensive ability. your NPCs can use these tactics, especially if it's a military unit! large foes or enemies with 2-handed weapons are a natural first-priority target for intelligent combatants... -- be warned, fair traveller; there are no maps for these territories. Gerall Kahla / gkahla / autom4tic [http://chromebob.com/] From mattley at gmail.com Sun Dec 19 17:11:43 2004 From: mattley at gmail.com (Matt Conrad) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 22:11:43 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] 2-handed weapons--gack! In-Reply-To: <51620.65.70.252.73.1103378760.squirrel@65.70.252.73> References: <51620.65.70.252.73.1103378760.squirrel@65.70.252.73> Message-ID: On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 08:06:00 -0600 (CST), Gerall Kahla wrote: > > > Does anyone else think the 2-handed weapons are overpowered for RQ? > > they pretty well reflect the reality of cutting through armor, IMHO... Probably so. I am so ready to compromise that for the sake of a continuous campaign, though. > > The problem is I let the guys pick whatever they wanted off the > > weapons list, and immediately one of the players picked the poleaxe > > (base 3d6) and another picked the giant hammer (base 2d6+2). (FYI, I > > have two other players, much less inclined to combat maximization.) > > got some min/max'ers in your group, eh? hmmm... Yes, though I didn't realize it until now. I kept them very limited in our first campaign, partly because I was just learning the rules, partly because it was logical for the setting. One of the guys, the one who was the whiniest about being allowed to minimax, used to be a pretty good player. He got some miniatures he likes, I gave him free rein on the weapons list, and now he thinks we're playing Warhammer. Sigh. Reminds me of my schoolteaching days. Don't hand out any freedoms you that you won't be comfortable having abused. > > I hadn't really thought it out beforehand, but these things are just > > monstrously deadly. With damage bonus, on an *average* hit, no > > Bladesharps, we're looking at 12 or so points of damage. Somebody > > wearing ringmail will go down at a single blow. On a better than > > average roll, or with a few points of Bladesharp, even someone with > > plate will go down at one hit. > > this is true. > > > Does anyone else find this out of sync? If so, how did you deal with it? > > when i had to deal with it, (i don't anymore - my group are definitely > *not* min/max fiends) i simply remembered to make my NPCs notice and react > to those weapons. A reasonable step, and I have thought of some weak points that could be targeted. However, my big concern is that they have upped the ante in "the world" by treating these as common weapons (yeah, that was my big mistake). If the PCs are using poleaxes, it will really bug me if the bad guys don't have them too, fairly regularly, but I do not want to run a high PC mortality game. In particular, I don't want my other two players who are more into roleplaying to have *their* characters slaughtered just so that the minimaxers face balanced opposition. Ok, pardon the whining. I've decided what to do, and that is to play a couple of sessions as is, and see whether the problems is as bad as I imagine. If so, I'll have a better idea of what to do about it after seeing it in action a few times. I might just be overreacting. > you can't carry a poleaxe concealed. people see these things. so, people > with large 2-handed weapons typically got targetted by any incoming > missile fire first. remember; if even one arm goes to 0 or fewer HP they > can't wield a 2-handed weapon! This is a good point. Grappling seemed like a risky but potentially effective tactic. Taking out an arm is also a good idea. > in a game i played in, the PCs developed a strategy. during the first > available declaration we'd all focus Disrupt. on the 3rd round of > fighting, the fastest of us would pick the largest target (or the target > with the 2-handed weapon) and (for a free action) yell out the target. > everyone then Disrupted the Minotaur, or the rhomphia-wielding sargeant, > or whomever. > > the only problem with this was the referee decided that the Lunar troops > targetted by this barrage would learn the trick themselves. > > an arms race ensued. Arms races are one thing I think is way cool about RQ. I'm looking ahead and seeing the potential for an evolving arms race to go on for a while, and I like it. But preferably without another total party kill as the object lesson. > however, it taught us the lesson that the person who swings the biggest > stick is probably also the person with the least defensive ability. Not really true in our case, alas. That would make things a lot more comfortable for me. > your NPCs can use these tactics, especially if it's a military unit! > large foes or enemies with 2-handed weapons are a natural first-priority > target for intelligent combatants... Maybe a logical in-game response is really all that's needed here. We'll see. Thanks for the input. Matt From steve at perrinworlds.com Sun Dec 19 20:12:29 2004 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 01:12:29 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] 2-handed weapons--gack! References: <51620.65.70.252.73.1103378760.squirrel@65.70.252.73> Message-ID: <002b01c4e5aa$fc36b020$68417442@wizard> I brought this up to some folks I am playing games with who were some of the original RQ players. In fact, one of them, Wayne Shaw, helped playtest the game at a DunDraCon convention before it was published. Their comment was big mucking weapons was what parrying was for. And when you have 3 point arms and 4 point armor, what did it matter if the incoming weapon did 8 points of damage or 15? Two handed weapons are also less useful as parrying weapons (not strictly true and something I have changed in SPQR) and take less damage than shields before breaking (true enough) . They haven't played RQ for awhile (we're playing Angel, actually) but remember it well. Steve Perrin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt Conrad" To: ; "RuneQuest rules discussion." Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 10:11 PM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] 2-handed weapons--gack! > On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 08:06:00 -0600 (CST), Gerall Kahla > wrote: > > > > > Does anyone else think the 2-handed weapons are overpowered for RQ? > > > > they pretty well reflect the reality of cutting through armor, IMHO... > > Probably so. I am so ready to compromise that for the sake of a > continuous campaign, though. > > > > The problem is I let the guys pick whatever they wanted off the > > > weapons list, and immediately one of the players picked the poleaxe > > > (base 3d6) and another picked the giant hammer (base 2d6+2). (FYI, I > > > have two other players, much less inclined to combat maximization.) > > > > got some min/max'ers in your group, eh? hmmm... > > Yes, though I didn't realize it until now. I kept them very limited > in our first campaign, partly because I was just learning the rules, > partly because it was logical for the setting. > > One of the guys, the one who was the whiniest about being allowed to > minimax, used to be a pretty good player. He got some miniatures he > likes, I gave him free rein on the weapons list, and now he thinks > we're playing Warhammer. Sigh. > > Reminds me of my schoolteaching days. Don't hand out any freedoms you > that you won't be comfortable having abused. > > > > I hadn't really thought it out beforehand, but these things are just > > > monstrously deadly. With damage bonus, on an *average* hit, no > > > Bladesharps, we're looking at 12 or so points of damage. Somebody > > > wearing ringmail will go down at a single blow. On a better than > > > average roll, or with a few points of Bladesharp, even someone with > > > plate will go down at one hit. > > > > this is true. > > > > > Does anyone else find this out of sync? If so, how did you deal with it? > > > > when i had to deal with it, (i don't anymore - my group are definitely > > *not* min/max fiends) i simply remembered to make my NPCs notice and react > > to those weapons. > > A reasonable step, and I have thought of some weak points that could > be targeted. > > However, my big concern is that they have upped the ante in "the > world" by treating these as common weapons (yeah, that was my big > mistake). If the PCs are using poleaxes, it will really bug me if the > bad guys don't have them too, fairly regularly, but I do not want to > run a high PC mortality game. In particular, I don't want my other > two players who are more into roleplaying to have *their* characters > slaughtered just so that the minimaxers face balanced opposition. > > Ok, pardon the whining. I've decided what to do, and that is to play > a couple of sessions as is, and see whether the problems is as bad as > I imagine. If so, I'll have a better idea of what to do about it > after seeing it in action a few times. I might just be overreacting. > > > you can't carry a poleaxe concealed. people see these things. so, people > > with large 2-handed weapons typically got targetted by any incoming > > missile fire first. remember; if even one arm goes to 0 or fewer HP they > > can't wield a 2-handed weapon! > > This is a good point. Grappling seemed like a risky but potentially > effective tactic. Taking out an arm is also a good idea. > > > in a game i played in, the PCs developed a strategy. during the first > > available declaration we'd all focus Disrupt. on the 3rd round of > > fighting, the fastest of us would pick the largest target (or the target > > with the 2-handed weapon) and (for a free action) yell out the target. > > everyone then Disrupted the Minotaur, or the rhomphia-wielding sargeant, > > or whomever. > > > > the only problem with this was the referee decided that the Lunar troops > > targetted by this barrage would learn the trick themselves. > > > > an arms race ensued. > > Arms races are one thing I think is way cool about RQ. I'm looking > ahead and seeing the potential for an evolving arms race to go on for > a while, and I like it. But preferably without another total party > kill as the object lesson. > > > however, it taught us the lesson that the person who swings the biggest > > stick is probably also the person with the least defensive ability. > > Not really true in our case, alas. That would make things a lot more > comfortable for me. > > > your NPCs can use these tactics, especially if it's a military unit! > > large foes or enemies with 2-handed weapons are a natural first-priority > > target for intelligent combatants... > > Maybe a logical in-game response is really all that's needed here. > We'll see. Thanks for the input. > > Matt > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules From pmj at comhem.se Mon Dec 20 01:59:37 2004 From: pmj at comhem.se (Peter Johansson) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 15:59:37 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] 2-handed weapons--gack! In-Reply-To: <51620.65.70.252.73.1103378760.squirrel@65.70.252.73> References: <51620.65.70.252.73.1103378760.squirrel@65.70.252.73> Message-ID: <41C59759.90103@comhem.se> Another way of "punishing" large two handed weapons like the pole axe, is to place limits on when they can be used. I would not allow PC:s to use their weapons with full skill and/or damage in a narrow corridor, a doorway, in the woods etc. Neither would I let PC:s fight side by side against their foes if they wield weapons like that and it makes it possible to have more than one NPC gang up on the pole axe guy with spears for instance which will make the limits of the pole axe painfully clear. Of course, once upon a time I had a PC that chopped of arms and legs, right and left, with a no restricted pole axe and it was great. ;-) Cheers, /Peter J Gerall Kahla wrote: >>Does anyone else think the 2-handed weapons are overpowered for RQ? >> >> >[snip] > >when i had to deal with it, (i don't anymore - my group are definitely >*not* min/max fiends) i simply remembered to make my NPCs notice and react >to those weapons. > >you can't carry a poleaxe concealed. people see these things. so, people >with large 2-handed weapons typically got targetted by any incoming >missile fire first. > From lancelot at inetnebr.com Mon Dec 20 02:24:16 2004 From: lancelot at inetnebr.com (lance dyas) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 09:24:16 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] 2-handed weapons--gack! In-Reply-To: <41C59759.90103@comhem.se> References: <51620.65.70.252.73.1103378760.squirrel@65.70.252.73> <41C59759.90103@comhem.se> Message-ID: <41C59D20.7000304@inetnebr.com> Peter Johansson wrote: > Another way of "punishing" large two handed weapons like the pole axe, > is to place limits on when they can be used. I would not allow PC:s to > use their weapons with full skill and/or damage in a narrow corridor, > a doorway, in the woods etc > . Neither would I let PC:s fight side by side against their foes if > they wield weapons like that and Historically that is exactly how it was done though, the users were trained in formation fighting Without that, I'd let them have one hit.. If they didnt take down there opponent the thing gets in the way next round attacks last and counts as staff until the push there adversary bac with an "imbalances staff" lke hit or manage a quality dodge. Parries are also difficult once they get under your reach RQ sans house rules doesnt really handle reach as well as it thinks it does (SR doesnt cut it). > it makes it possible to have more than one NPC gang up on the pole axe > guy with spears for instance which will make the limits of the pole > axe painfully clear. > > Of course, once upon a time I had a PC that chopped of arms and legs, > right and left, with a no restricted pole axe and it was great. ;-) > > Cheers, > > /Peter J > > > Gerall Kahla wrote: > >>> Does anyone else think the 2-handed weapons are overpowered for RQ? >>> >> >> [snip] >> >> when i had to deal with it, (i don't anymore - my group are definitely >> *not* min/max fiends) i simply remembered to make my NPCs notice and >> react >> to those weapons. >> >> you can't carry a poleaxe concealed. people see these things. so, >> people >> with large 2-handed weapons typically got targetted by any incoming >> missile fire first. >> > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > > . > -- Google Me at : Decision Driven Rolegaming -- Lance Dyas Destiny the Hand of Fate - at the Decision Driven Gaming Center http://www.dyasdesigns.com/roleplay/Fate/StrategicEdge.pdf From mattley at gmail.com Mon Dec 20 03:11:33 2004 From: mattley at gmail.com (Matt Conrad) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 08:11:33 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] 2-handed weapons--gack! In-Reply-To: <002b01c4e5aa$fc36b020$68417442@wizard> References: <51620.65.70.252.73.1103378760.squirrel@65.70.252.73> <002b01c4e5aa$fc36b020$68417442@wizard> Message-ID: On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 01:12:29 -0800, Steve Perrin wrote: > I brought this up to some folks I am playing games with who were some of the > original RQ players. In fact, one of them, Wayne Shaw, helped playtest the > game at a DunDraCon convention before it was published. > > Their comment was big mucking weapons was what parrying was for. Sure, but you don't always make your parry. And if you're parrying with a quarterstaff, like our healer is . . . > And when > you have 3 point arms and 4 point armor, what did it matter if the incoming > weapon did 8 points of damage or 15? It's the difference between needing a Heal 2 to be in pretty good working order, and being near death with an arm on the ground that no PC is capable of restoring. In our game, quite a difference. We're used to melee taking a while, with a lot of missed attacks or successful parries rendering attacks ineffectual, successful attacks only sometimes disabling, maiming fairly rare, casting Heal spells during battle a useful tactic. Moving from that to "one successful hit = dead or maimed" will be quite a change. > Two handed weapons are also less useful as parrying weapons (not strictly > true and something I have changed in SPQR) and take less damage than shields > before breaking (true enough) . Yes, losing your weapon and parry at the same time is a substantial disadvantage. Weapon breakage is something we're going to have to pay more attention to. Matt From gianni at basicrps.com Mon Dec 20 03:27:17 2004 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 17:27:17 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] 2-handed weapons--gack! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1103473637.41c5abe58b118@imp.webhuset.no> Hey Matt > The problem is I let the guys pick whatever they wanted off the > weapons list, and immediately one of the players picked the poleaxe > (base 3d6) Well, for one thing, I ruel that this kind of weapon is impossible to use in a confined space (house, underground, dense wood...). It limits its use a lot. Foes usually do not attack the PCs in the open! G. From aescleal at btinternet.com Mon Dec 20 07:03:24 2004 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (ASHLEY MUNDAY) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 20:03:24 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] 2-handed weapons--gack! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041219200324.80753.qmail@web86203.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> If you're really concerned about adventurers having "uber-weapons" like pole-axes, halberds and mauls, put them up against either: (a) A bunch of Elves they'll be hard pressed to bring to melee but which can slaughter them with speedart and arrow trance; (b) A bunch of Dwarves with guns, repeating cross bows and decent iron armour; (c) A bunch of Dark Trolls with equally hefty weapons and a damage bonus no human can get. Ho ho ho. If you want to be a bit more subtle, one casual use of Demoralise can leave the adventurer with the big pointy stick not really wanting to press an advantage and Fanaticism leaves them wide open to attack and unable to withdraw. A decent shaman can dullblade their weapons, dispel bladesharps and attack them on the spirit plane. You can also try fights in restricted spaces - try swinging yer maul or greatsword in here mate, against flying creatures with missile weapons, places they can only use one hand or against an opponent that smashes their weapons up. Finally their long weapons are a liability against someone with a shield that actively closes with them. Even more subtle, let them mince someone that turns out to tbe important. Yet more subtle, remind them that there's a society out there and when they slaughter Odd the Berserk* there's his brother Snorri the Lawspeaker and an entire clan after 'em. You don't have to kill them, just make 'em think a bit. Combat monsters are only combat monsters if you let them. Cheers, Ash *The spirit possession variant of Berserk presented in Vikings is a really laugh when facing down geezers with pole-axes or halberd. They end up crying like girls and futily trying to use the haft or knockback to do some damage. --- Matt Conrad wrote: > On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 08:06:00 -0600 (CST), Gerall > Kahla > wrote: > > > > > Does anyone else think the 2-handed weapons are > overpowered for RQ? > > > > they pretty well reflect the reality of cutting > through armor, IMHO... > > Probably so. I am so ready to compromise that for > the sake of a > continuous campaign, though. > > > > The problem is I let the guys pick whatever they > wanted off the > > > weapons list, and immediately one of the players > picked the poleaxe > > > (base 3d6) and another picked the giant hammer > (base 2d6+2). (FYI, I > > > have two other players, much less inclined to > combat maximization.) > > > > got some min/max'ers in your group, eh? hmmm... > > Yes, though I didn't realize it until now. I kept > them very limited > in our first campaign, partly because I was just > learning the rules, > partly because it was logical for the setting. > > One of the guys, the one who was the whiniest about > being allowed to > minimax, used to be a pretty good player. He got > some miniatures he > likes, I gave him free rein on the weapons list, and > now he thinks > we're playing Warhammer. Sigh. > > Reminds me of my schoolteaching days. Don't hand > out any freedoms you > that you won't be comfortable having abused. > > > > I hadn't really thought it out beforehand, but > these things are just > > > monstrously deadly. With damage bonus, on an > *average* hit, no > > > Bladesharps, we're looking at 12 or so points of > damage. Somebody > > > wearing ringmail will go down at a single blow. > On a better than > > > average roll, or with a few points of > Bladesharp, even someone with > > > plate will go down at one hit. > > > > this is true. > > > > > Does anyone else find this out of sync? If so, > how did you deal with it? > > > > when i had to deal with it, (i don't anymore - my > group are definitely > > *not* min/max fiends) i simply remembered to make > my NPCs notice and react > > to those weapons. > > A reasonable step, and I have thought of some weak > points that could > be targeted. > > However, my big concern is that they have upped the > ante in "the > world" by treating these as common weapons (yeah, > that was my big > mistake). If the PCs are using poleaxes, it will > really bug me if the > bad guys don't have them too, fairly regularly, but > I do not want to > run a high PC mortality game. In particular, I > don't want my other > two players who are more into roleplaying to have > *their* characters > slaughtered just so that the minimaxers face > balanced opposition. > > Ok, pardon the whining. I've decided what to do, > and that is to play > a couple of sessions as is, and see whether the > problems is as bad as > I imagine. If so, I'll have a better idea of what > to do about it > after seeing it in action a few times. I might just > be overreacting. > > > you can't carry a poleaxe concealed. people see > these things. so, people > > with large 2-handed weapons typically got > targetted by any incoming > > missile fire first. remember; if even one arm > goes to 0 or fewer HP they > > can't wield a 2-handed weapon! > > This is a good point. Grappling seemed like a risky > but potentially > effective tactic. Taking out an arm is also a good > idea. > > > in a game i played in, the PCs developed a > strategy. during the first > > available declaration we'd all focus Disrupt. on > the 3rd round of > > fighting, the fastest of us would pick the largest > target (or the target > > with the 2-handed weapon) and (for a free action) > yell out the target. > > everyone then Disrupted the Minotaur, or the > rhomphia-wielding sargeant, > > or whomever. > > > > the only problem with this was the referee decided > that the Lunar troops > > targetted by this barrage would learn the trick > themselves. > > > > an arms race ensued. > > Arms races are one thing I think is way cool about > RQ. I'm looking > ahead and seeing the potential for an evolving arms > race to go on for > a while, and I like it. But preferably without > another total party > kill as the object lesson. > > > however, it taught us the lesson that the person > who swings the biggest > > stick is probably also the person with the least > defensive ability. > > Not really true in our case, alas. That would make > things a lot more > comfortable for me. > > > your NPCs can use these tactics, especially if > it's a military unit! > > large foes or enemies with 2-handed weapons are a > natural first-priority > > target for intelligent combatants... > > Maybe a logical in-game response is really all > that's needed here. > We'll see. Thanks for the input. > > Matt > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > From soltakss at yahoo.com Mon Dec 20 07:53:35 2004 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (Simon Phipp) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 20:53:35 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: 2-handed weapons In-Reply-To: <20041219200400.46E9C2226F8@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: <20041219205335.46106.qmail@web51001.mail.yahoo.com> On the problem of minimaxers abusing the weapons list: 1. If weapons are available, then any PC can use them, there is nothing wrong with this. 2. There is no super-weapon in RQ - all weapons have advantages and disadvantages. A Pole Axe requires high STR and DEX and has a high ENC, for instance. However, some GMs may think that a PC doing 3D6+1D4 damage is too unbalancing. I am not too sure, but I will accept that in certain campaigns it may be true. There are some ways around this, depending on the type of campaign and where the campaign is set. As has been mentioned before, Pole Axes and Mauls are pretty useless in narrow corridors or low-ceilinged rooms, apply a heavy penalty (half chance perhaps) in these circumstances or simply say "you can't use them here". Allow opponents to close on the wielder of the Pole Axe - some people play that when closed, SRs are reversed, so a shorter weapon goes first. This might surprise the Pole Axe wielder. Make MPCs concentrate their fire on the most dangerous person, the one with the biggest weapon. That's what the PCs would do, after all. If they complain then tough. Now, for the gaming reasons why certain weapons are taboo. First of all, there are cultural reasons why some weaons are OK and some are not. In Glorantha, for instance, Orlanthi rarely use axes (sword/spear and shiled is the norm) so an axe wielder would be unusual. In Alternate Earth, someone with a pole axe would stand out in many cultures. Make people distrust them, have the city guard consfiscate large weapons, have them followed around by soldiers, have people ask them about the weapon and say things like "isn't a spear good enough for you". Think of the spells available for certain weapons. This will appeal to any minimaxer. If they realise that only a few cults supply True Axe or Slash then they will go with spears and shields. If a pole axe isn't a weapon needed for Rune Lord then a proper miniaxer will not rely on it. Actually, a proper minimaxer would use two weapons in alternate combats, one to do loads of damage and one fr cult progression, so he gets two ticks and increases them both. Make them expensive and let them know that only a few weaponsmiths can repair them or make new ones. "We don't get many of these, it'll take a while to mend them, I need the right parts ....". Perhaps only large cities sell pole axes. If all else fails, then have their enemies roll up with Pole Axes and tear the party to shreds. After all, they can have high Bladesharps and high Damage Bonuses. Get them to cast Crack on the Pole Axe - he can't attack or parry. After a while, the min imaxer will call a truce. In any case, once they get divine magic, it becomes pretty irrelevant as they can stack up on spells and even pole axes will bounce, or they can get Bladesharp 8 and cut through any armour. See Ya Simon ___________________________________________________________ ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From ameron1 at blueyonder.co.uk Mon Dec 20 09:23:03 2004 From: ameron1 at blueyonder.co.uk (Ian 'Earl' Martin) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 22:23:03 -0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: RQ-Rules Digest, 2 handed weapons In-Reply-To: <20041219200400.9D179222702@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: <000001c4e619$4e591b90$6401a8c0@MASTER> My current group has members with both one and two handed weapons, although no one has gone for a poleaxe etc, the biggest is the 2handed sword. They know from past play how much of a pain a large weapon is. You just need to confine them, in dungeons, in tunnels etc and the weapon is useless, but they still have to transport it... so guys your running from the trolls? Ok you guys without the huge pole arms can run at 3SR, you guys with the pole arms, well there going to restrict you to 1SR because of the constant manoeuvring to get them round corners and through the crawl spaces. If they disagree, ask one of them to run through your house with the prop from the washing line... never had to explain it again after that :) Any intelligent NPC will not want to get in range of those things, so they will hang back and use spells/missile/cry for more help. Personally I don't have a problem with someone using these things, because they come with some serious disadvantages, and of course most towns don't allow strung bows, 2 handed weapons and blades that are not peace bonded. That can cause them to have to leave the weapons behind often and also dumping them to run away is going to mount up as a cost. Also if they bump heads with something big strong and with hands, I would have it try and grab the haft and haul it out of there hands, especially if they are using it to block an advance. If all else fails, talk to your players and explain that you don't think the pole arms are fitting into the campaign and offer to let them switch there skill to another weapon, if they want to keep using it after the GM mentions that... well they got there warning. Ian. From mattley at gmail.com Mon Dec 20 15:06:38 2004 From: mattley at gmail.com (Matt Conrad) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 20:06:38 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] 2-handed weapons--gack! In-Reply-To: <1103473637.41c5abe58b118@imp.webhuset.no> References: <1103473637.41c5abe58b118@imp.webhuset.no> Message-ID: Thanks to everyone who replied. Many good suggestions. We'll see how it plays out, but the problem now seems more manageable than I thought earlier. Great group. Matt From mattley at gmail.com Mon Dec 20 15:20:50 2004 From: mattley at gmail.com (Matt Conrad) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 20:20:50 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Vikings! (WAS: 2-handed weapons--gack!) In-Reply-To: <20041219200324.80753.qmail@web86203.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <20041219200324.80753.qmail@web86203.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: > Even more subtle, let them mince someone that turns > out to tbe important. Yet more subtle, remind them > that there's a society out there and when they > slaughter Odd the Berserk* there's his brother Snorri > the Lawspeaker and an entire clan after 'em. Whoa! Did I mention that these guys are going to be Vikings? I don't think I did--strange that you chose this example. I am rereading Njal's Saga as part of my prep--the battles there have a Runequesty feel that is uncanny. The players are going to start off on a raiding/trading mission, but I'm really looking forward to getting them back to their homeland where I have lots of fun ideas. Anyway, I was curious--is the Vikings supplement for RQ any good? I thought about trying to pick it up on ebay, but not knowing anything about it, and not really having loads of spare $$$, decided not to bother. But since I'm flapping my gums already, what do you guys think of it? Matt From steve at perrinworlds.com Mon Dec 20 17:38:30 2004 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 22:38:30 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Vikings! (WAS: 2-handed weapons--gack!) References: <20041219200324.80753.qmail@web86203.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <002601c4e65e$a370f5e0$68417442@wizard> Viking supplement excellent. Some of Ken Rolston's best work. Did I ever mention that I had read Njal's saga a couple of times before I wrote RuneQuest? Steve Perrin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt Conrad" To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2004 8:20 PM Subject: [RQ-Rules] Vikings! (WAS: 2-handed weapons--gack!) > > > > Even more subtle, let them mince someone that turns > > out to tbe important. Yet more subtle, remind them > > that there's a society out there and when they > > slaughter Odd the Berserk* there's his brother Snorri > > the Lawspeaker and an entire clan after 'em. > > Whoa! Did I mention that these guys are going to be Vikings? I don't > think I did--strange that you chose this example. > > I am rereading Njal's Saga as part of my prep--the battles there have > a Runequesty feel that is uncanny. > > The players are going to start off on a raiding/trading mission, but > I'm really looking forward to getting them back to their homeland > where I have lots of fun ideas. > > Anyway, I was curious--is the Vikings supplement for RQ any good? I > thought about trying to pick it up on ebay, but not knowing anything > about it, and not really having loads of spare $$$, decided not to > bother. But since I'm flapping my gums already, what do you guys > think of it? > > Matt > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules From steve at perrinworlds.com Mon Dec 20 17:40:37 2004 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 22:40:37 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Vikings! (WAS: 2-handed weapons--gack!) References: <20041219200324.80753.qmail@web86203.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <002701c4e65e$f11de8c0$68417442@wizard> BTW When reading Njal's Saga (at least the Penguin translation that I read), do not let the use of the term "halberd" fool you. It's a case of the translator not knowing weaponry. Just read battleaxe every time you see halberd and you'll be fine. Steve Perrin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt Conrad" To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2004 8:20 PM Subject: [RQ-Rules] Vikings! (WAS: 2-handed weapons--gack!) > > > > Even more subtle, let them mince someone that turns > > out to tbe important. Yet more subtle, remind them > > that there's a society out there and when they > > slaughter Odd the Berserk* there's his brother Snorri > > the Lawspeaker and an entire clan after 'em. > > Whoa! Did I mention that these guys are going to be Vikings? I don't > think I did--strange that you chose this example. > > I am rereading Njal's Saga as part of my prep--the battles there have > a Runequesty feel that is uncanny. > > The players are going to start off on a raiding/trading mission, but > I'm really looking forward to getting them back to their homeland > where I have lots of fun ideas. > > Anyway, I was curious--is the Vikings supplement for RQ any good? I > thought about trying to pick it up on ebay, but not knowing anything > about it, and not really having loads of spare $$$, decided not to > bother. But since I'm flapping my gums already, what do you guys > think of it? > > Matt > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules From Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za Mon Dec 20 18:01:51 2004 From: Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za (Den, Tony T) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 09:01:51 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Vikings! (WAS: 2-handed weapons--gack!) Message-ID: Matt Conrad wrote: Anyway, I was curious--is the Vikings supplement for RQ any good? I thought about trying to pick it up on ebay, but not knowing anything about it, and not really having loads of spare $$$, decided not to bother. But since I'm flapping my gums already, what do you guys think of it? I personally think it is one of the best of the AH RuneQuest III supplements - the culture write-up is good, there are stats for Aurochs (new creatures always good to see) and a number of interesting bits on magic, ships and well, I suppose Vikings in general. It comes on eBay a lot, so it pretty easy to pick up cheap if you wait for the right seller/timing. Also, in a Dragon Magazine, around issue 160, there was a review of various Viking products, including RQ Vikings, which really seemed to blow the reviewer away in comparison with the rest. Cheers Tony __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Standard Bank Disclaimer and Confidentiality Note This e-mail, its attachments and any rights attaching hereto are, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, the property of Standard Bank Group Limited and/or its subsidiaries ("the Group"). It is confidential, private and intended for the addressee only. Should you not be the addressee and receive this e-mail by mistake, kindly notify the sender, and delete this e-mail, immediately and do not disclose or use same in any manner whatsoever. Views and opinions expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender unless clearly stated as those of the Group. The Group accepts no liability whatsoever for any loss or damages whatsoever and howsoever incurred, or suffered, resulting, or arising, from the use of this email or its attachments. The Group does not warrant the integrity of this e-mail nor that it is free of errors, viruses, interception or interference. Licensed divisions of the Standard Bank Group are authorised financial services providers in terms of the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act, No 37 of 2002 (FAIS). For information about the Standard Bank Group Limited visit our website http://www.standardbank.co.za ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From freyrvanic at earthlink.net Mon Dec 20 18:12:58 2004 From: freyrvanic at earthlink.net (Sven Lugar) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 23:12:58 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Vikings! (WAS: 2-handed weapons--gack!) Message-ID: <410-220041212071258765@earthlink.net> I must second this appraisal of the Vikings Supplement. It is really well thought out & consistent. manga takk, Sven > [Original Message] > From: Den, Tony T > To: RuneQuest rules discussion. > Date: 12/20/2004 3:01:32 AM > Subject: RE: [RQ-Rules] Vikings! (WAS: 2-handed weapons--gack!) > > Matt Conrad wrote: > Anyway, I was curious--is the Vikings supplement for RQ any good? I > thought about trying to pick it up on ebay, but not knowing anything > about it, and not really having loads of spare $$$, decided not to > bother. But since I'm flapping my gums already, what do you guys > think of it? > > > I personally think it is one of the best of the AH RuneQuest III supplements > - the culture write-up is good, there are stats for Aurochs (new creatures > always good to see) and a number of interesting bits on magic, ships and > well, I suppose Vikings in general. It comes on eBay a lot, so it pretty > easy to pick up cheap if you wait for the right seller/timing. Also, in a > Dragon Magazine, around issue 160, there was a review of various Viking > products, including RQ Vikings, which really seemed to blow the reviewer > away in comparison with the rest. > Cheers > Tony > > ____________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________ > > Standard Bank Disclaimer and Confidentiality Note > > This e-mail, its attachments and any rights attaching hereto are, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, the property of Standard Bank Group Limited and/or its subsidiaries ("the Group"). It is confidential, private and intended for the addressee only. > > Should you not be the addressee and receive this e-mail by mistake, kindly notify the sender, and delete this e-mail, immediately and do not disclose or use same in any manner whatsoever. > > Views and opinions expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender unless clearly stated as those of the Group. The Group accepts no liability whatsoever for any loss or damages whatsoever and howsoever incurred, or suffered, resulting, or arising, from the use of this email or its attachments. > > The Group does not warrant the integrity of this e-mail nor that it is free of errors, viruses, interception or interference. > > Licensed divisions of the Standard Bank Group are authorised financial services providers in terms of the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act, No 37 of 2002 (FAIS). > > For information about the Standard Bank Group Limited visit our website http://www.standardbank.co.za > ____________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________ > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules From freyrvanic at earthlink.net Mon Dec 20 18:17:18 2004 From: freyrvanic at earthlink.net (Sven Lugar) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 23:17:18 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Vikings! (WAS: 2-handed weapons--gack!) Message-ID: <410-220041212071718921@earthlink.net> Poor Thorgrim the Eastener, but he had a great sense of humor! And yes, Gunnar was home! ROFLMA it's one of my favorite parts of all of the sagas. I've used sections of Egil's Saga, Laxdaela Saga, Hrolf Kraki's Saga, & Eyrbyggja's Saga as plot elements. The Kalevala is also an excellent source. manga takk, Sven > [Original Message] > From: Steve Perrin > To: Matt Conrad ; RuneQuest rules discussion. > Date: 12/19/2004 10:42:37 PM > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Vikings! (WAS: 2-handed weapons--gack!) > > BTW > > When reading Njal's Saga (at least the Penguin translation that I read), do > not let the use of the term "halberd" fool you. It's a case of the > translator not knowing weaponry. Just read battleaxe every time you see > halberd and you'll be fine. > > Steve Perrin > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Matt Conrad" > To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." > Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2004 8:20 PM > Subject: [RQ-Rules] Vikings! (WAS: 2-handed weapons--gack!) > > > > > > > > > Even more subtle, let them mince someone that turns > > > out to tbe important. Yet more subtle, remind them > > > that there's a society out there and when they > > > slaughter Odd the Berserk* there's his brother Snorri > > > the Lawspeaker and an entire clan after 'em. > > > > Whoa! Did I mention that these guys are going to be Vikings? I don't > > think I did--strange that you chose this example. > > > > I am rereading Njal's Saga as part of my prep--the battles there have > > a Runequesty feel that is uncanny. > > > > The players are going to start off on a raiding/trading mission, but > > I'm really looking forward to getting them back to their homeland > > where I have lots of fun ideas. > > > > Anyway, I was curious--is the Vikings supplement for RQ any good? I > > thought about trying to pick it up on ebay, but not knowing anything > > about it, and not really having loads of spare $$$, decided not to > > bother. But since I'm flapping my gums already, what do you guys > > think of it? > > > > Matt > > _______________________________________________ > > RQ-Rules mailing list > > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules From aescleal at btinternet.com Mon Dec 20 21:15:24 2004 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (ASHLEY MUNDAY) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 10:15:24 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Vikings! (WAS: 2-handed weapons--gack!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041220101524.94614.qmail@web86201.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Vikings is bloody excellent - the two alternative Earth for RQ were truly superb and should be bought by everyone. If you've got the cash that is... Cheers, Ash --- Matt Conrad wrote: > > > > Even more subtle, let them mince someone that > turns > > out to tbe important. Yet more subtle, remind them > > that there's a society out there and when they > > slaughter Odd the Berserk* there's his brother > Snorri > > the Lawspeaker and an entire clan after 'em. > > Whoa! Did I mention that these guys are going to be > Vikings? I don't > think I did--strange that you chose this example. > > I am rereading Njal's Saga as part of my prep--the > battles there have > a Runequesty feel that is uncanny. > > The players are going to start off on a > raiding/trading mission, but > I'm really looking forward to getting them back to > their homeland > where I have lots of fun ideas. > > Anyway, I was curious--is the Vikings supplement for > RQ any good? I > thought about trying to pick it up on ebay, but not > knowing anything > about it, and not really having loads of spare $$$, > decided not to > bother. But since I'm flapping my gums already, > what do you guys > think of it? > > Matt > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > From bick10 at comcast.net Tue Dec 21 01:38:11 2004 From: bick10 at comcast.net (bick10 at comcast.net) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 14:38:11 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] 2-handed weapons Message-ID: <122020041438.11461.41C6E3D3000613B200002CC52206998499CFCE050C070D@comcast.net> Do you use Fagtuge rules? I found that the Min/Max'ers don't like to have their fighting abilities reduced due to fatuge loss from non-combat activity. Don't forget to remove FG for normal travel, or running to and from fights. Under the Standard RQ3 FG rules, traveling with seveal weapons, and heavy armor will slow the tanks down. > Simon > Allow opponents to close on the wielder of the Pole Axe - some people play > that when closed, SRs are reversed, so a shorter weapon goes first. This > might surprise the Pole Axe wielder. Says so in the rules. If I recall correctly, when an opponent with a shorter weapon (per weapon SR) tries to close on an opponent with a longer weapon, the longer weapon wielder must either give up ground or first strike. If the first strike is lost, the longer weapon wielder can not attack until after the shorter weapon wielders attack SR. Some have tried to circumvent this by stating that they are attacking another opponent within reach at their normal SR. In those cases, I ruled that they were not giving the close in attacker their dues and provided a +20% to the short weapon fighter. By the closing rules it is easy for the long weapon wielder to keep a distance. Back up. But when fighting back to back with a fellow adventure, the long weapon wielder would then move sidewise, allowing both to be surrounded. And if they are already surrounded then there is nowhere to go. By pressing the closing I have seen the long weapons giving up doorways; being forced back over bridges; opening gaps in the battle line; allowing companions to get surrounded... I have seen these guys get chewed out by other players for putting them in danger for insisting on using the wrong weapon for the situation. > Actually, a > proper minimaxer would use two weapons in alternate combats, one to do loads > of damage and one fr cult progression, so he gets two ticks and increases > them both. Pet Peeve!!!- Check hunters. Sure the players all do that to some extent. But when it is so blatant, or worse, when drop one weapon after earning a check to use an alternate to gain a check, I loose my cool. All of their opponents suddenly become 20 or 40% better. sorry, sore spot there. Good luck and have fun, Jim From jurrubin at earthlink.net Tue Dec 21 01:50:08 2004 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:50:08 -0600 (GMT-06:00) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Vikings! (WAS: 2-handed weapons--gack!) Message-ID: <12932192.1103554208260.JavaMail.root@statler.psp.pas.earthlink.net> And I'll stand behind Ashley's (and everyone else's) recommendation. The Viking supplement gives a very good overview of Viking society from a RQ point of view. It includes rules for "things" and lawspeaking. Land of the Ninja was also one of my favorites. Both have seen heavy use as adjuncts to my main medieval (12th century) campaigns since the supplements were first published. Though I strongly recommend picking up both, for a western Europe campaign the Viking supplement has the most use. I've used some of the rules for the Germanic tribes during a brief Roman Empire campaign. If you _really_ want a detailed Viking campaign, get the RQ Viking supplement then take a peek at the GURPS supplement. David Smart -----Original Message----- From: ASHLEY MUNDAY Sent: Dec 20, 2004 4:15 AM To: Matt Conrad , "RuneQuest rules discussion." Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Vikings! (WAS: 2-handed weapons--gack!) Vikings is bloody excellent - the two alternative Earth for RQ were truly superb and should be bought by everyone. If you've got the cash that is... Cheers, Ash From Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za Tue Dec 21 01:55:00 2004 From: Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za (Den, Tony T) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 16:55:00 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Vikings! (WAS: 2-handed weapons--gack!) Message-ID: I have never played a teutonic campaign, but after reading Vikings and Simon Grundy's Reingold, I reckon that anyone with a roman map of Germania would be well equipped to run such. David Smart And I'll stand behind Ashley's (and everyone else's) recommendation. The Viking supplement gives a very good overview of Viking society from a RQ point of view. It includes rules for "things" and lawspeaking. Land of the Ninja was also one of my favorites. Both have seen heavy use as adjuncts to my main medieval (12th century) campaigns since the supplements were first published. Though I strongly recommend picking up both, for a western Europe campaign the Viking supplement has the most use. I've used some of the rules for the Germanic tribes during a brief Roman Empire campaign. If you _really_ want a detailed Viking campaign, get the RQ Viking supplement then take a peek at the GURPS supplement. David Smart __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Standard Bank Disclaimer and Confidentiality Note This e-mail, its attachments and any rights attaching hereto are, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, the property of Standard Bank Group Limited and/or its subsidiaries ("the Group"). It is confidential, private and intended for the addressee only. Should you not be the addressee and receive this e-mail by mistake, kindly notify the sender, and delete this e-mail, immediately and do not disclose or use same in any manner whatsoever. Views and opinions expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender unless clearly stated as those of the Group. The Group accepts no liability whatsoever for any loss or damages whatsoever and howsoever incurred, or suffered, resulting, or arising, from the use of this email or its attachments. The Group does not warrant the integrity of this e-mail nor that it is free of errors, viruses, interception or interference. Licensed divisions of the Standard Bank Group are authorised financial services providers in terms of the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act, No 37 of 2002 (FAIS). For information about the Standard Bank Group Limited visit our website http://www.standardbank.co.za ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From jurrubin at earthlink.net Tue Dec 21 01:58:21 2004 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:58:21 -0600 (GMT-06:00) Subject: [RQ-Rules] 2-handed weapons Message-ID: <15121422.1103554701469.JavaMail.root@statler.psp.pas.earthlink.net> *grin* Jim, we have similar GM styles and sore spots. David Smart From jurrubin at earthlink.net Tue Dec 21 03:44:13 2004 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 10:44:13 -0600 (GMT-06:00) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Vikings! (WAS: 2-handed weapons--gack!) Message-ID: <15103575.1103561053950.JavaMail.root@skeeter.psp.pas.earthlink.net> That's rather cool, Steve; thank you for sharing that. I always enjoy finding out what game designers use for their inspiration. David -----Original Message----- From: Steve Perrin Sent: Dec 20, 2004 12:38 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Vikings! (WAS: 2-handed weapons--gack!) Did I ever mention that I had read Njal's saga a couple of times before I wrote RuneQuest? Steve Perrin From mattley at gmail.com Tue Dec 21 15:57:55 2004 From: mattley at gmail.com (Matt Conrad) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 20:57:55 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Vikings! (WAS: 2-handed weapons--gack!) In-Reply-To: <410-220041212071718921@earthlink.net> References: <410-220041212071718921@earthlink.net> Message-ID: On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 23:17:18 -0800, Sven Lugar wrote: > Poor Thorgrim the Eastener, but he had a great sense of humor! Sooner or later, some unlucky NPC will have occasion to echo those last words. > And yes, > Gunnar was home! ROFLMA it's one of my favorite parts of all of the sagas. > I've used sections of Egil's Saga, Laxdaela Saga, Hrolf Kraki's Saga, & > Eyrbyggja's Saga as plot elements. The Kalevala is also an excellent source. > manga takk, > Sven Njal's Saga is a gold mine for ideas all in itself. Other than that, I have only read Egil's Saga and Gisli's Saga and the details there are all but lost. I hope to get a chance to reread those too, but yanno, so many books so little time. Matt From freyrvanic at earthlink.net Tue Dec 21 16:20:43 2004 From: freyrvanic at earthlink.net (Sven Lugar) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 21:20:43 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Vikings! (WAS: 2-handed weapons--gack!) Message-ID: <410-220041222152043375@earthlink.net> Most Penguin Sagas have a synopsis sort of thing in the back. Do a quick scan thru there & glom onto ideas. Also There were several RuneQuest players in the Ventura area as I recall from past discussions. Because I'm headed back to school (50 years old & all that) in Santa Barbarian, I will be closer to the area. Perhaps we can get together for a game. Drop me an email & we'll link up freyrvanic at earthlink.net later, Sven Sven Lugar freyrvanic at earthlink.net homepage: http://home.earthlink.net/~freyrvanic/ From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Tue Dec 21 22:06:48 2004 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 11:06:48 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Vikings! (WAS: 2-handed weapons--gack!) Message-ID: > > Just two comments to this interesting topic: > > > > 1: The vikings did have rather big axes, called poleaxes in RQ. They can > > easily be issued viking NPC's and PC's. They can be used together with > > shield if you have a strap attached. This way your character can have >cover > > from missile fire while closing distance, then flinging the shield on >the > > back and heaving the poleaxe from the shoulder into the twohandgrip :) > > > > 2: > > Polearms can be used as quarterstaffs, as spears and as axes. I took the > > consiquence of that, and > > have ended up with houserules on weapondamage that slows down gameplay, >so > > for the flow-reaks out there, just skip this one. For the pollaxes >(meant > > for striking through armor), I've invented armor-piercing rules. > > > > I let all weapons do 4 types of damage, cutting, grappeling, bashing and > > piercing. > > I allso have players allways stating how they attack with their weapon > > (and if they don't I've made a d10-table that tells how you attacked >with > > the thing). > > > > So the hellebard do the gruesome 3d6 attack with it's cleaver, the same >as a > > 2h.spear when stabbing, and the same as a quarterstaff when stunning >with > > the blunt end (that often wasn't blunt at all, but equipped with a spear > > tip-in wich case that end allso will do the same as a 2h. spear stab). > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > MSN Messenger http://www.msn.no/computing/messenger Den raskeste veien > > mellom deg og dine venner > > > > _________________________________________________________________ MSN Messenger http://www.msn.no/computing/messenger Den raskeste veien mellom deg og dine venner From aescleal at btinternet.com Wed Dec 22 01:40:38 2004 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (ASHLEY MUNDAY) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 14:40:38 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Vikings! (WAS: 2-handed weapons--gack!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041221144038.71353.qmail@web86206.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> You really ought to play Aftermath, sounds right up your street. Cheers, Ash --- Bjorn Stolen wrote: > > > Just two comments to this interesting topic: > > > > > > 1: The vikings did have rather big axes, called > poleaxes in RQ. They can > > > easily be issued viking NPC's and PC's. They can > be used together with > > > shield if you have a strap attached. This way > your character can have > >cover > > > from missile fire while closing distance, then > flinging the shield on > >the > > > back and heaving the poleaxe from the shoulder > into the twohandgrip :) > > > > > > 2: > > > Polearms can be used as quarterstaffs, as spears > and as axes. I took the > > > consiquence of that, and > > > have ended up with houserules on weapondamage > that slows down gameplay, > >so > > > for the flow-reaks out there, just skip this > one. For the pollaxes > >(meant > > > for striking through armor), I've invented > armor-piercing rules. > > > > > > I let all weapons do 4 types of damage, cutting, > grappeling, bashing and > > > piercing. > > > I allso have players allways stating how they > attack with their weapon > > > (and if they don't I've made a d10-table that > tells how you attacked > >with > > > the thing). > > > > > > So the hellebard do the gruesome 3d6 attack with > it's cleaver, the same > >as a > > > 2h.spear when stabbing, and the same as a > quarterstaff when stunning > >with > > > the blunt end (that often wasn't blunt at all, > but equipped with a spear > > > tip-in wich case that end allso will do the same > as a 2h. spear stab). > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > MSN Messenger > http://www.msn.no/computing/messenger Den raskeste > veien > > > mellom deg og dine venner > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > MSN Messenger http://www.msn.no/computing/messenger > Den raskeste veien > mellom deg og dine venner > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > From petersven at yahoo.com Wed Dec 22 07:37:55 2004 From: petersven at yahoo.com (Peter Svensson) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 12:37:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 12, Issue 8 In-Reply-To: <20041220071642.ED24D222740@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: <20041221203755.75906.qmail@web52809.mail.yahoo.com> Steve Perrin wrote: >When reading Njal's Saga (at least the Penguin >translation that I read), do >not let the use of the term "halberd" fool you. It's a >case of the >translator not knowing weaponry. Just read battleaxe >every time you see >halberd and you'll be fine. It may not have been a proper halberd, but Njal's weapon seems to have been capable of thrusting. Thorgrim's famous quip comes about after Njal strikes him through a window, which is hard to do with regular axe. Also, the Icelandic term for Njal's weapon was atgeir, or "spear-axe," according to this discussion: http://forums.swordforum.com/showthread.php?s=b5b64ccef307a37601e9202a41e6b432&threadid=31909&goto=nextnewest __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Jazz up your holiday email with celebrity designs. Learn more. http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com From freyrvanic at earthlink.net Wed Dec 22 13:14:13 2004 From: freyrvanic at earthlink.net (Sven Lugar) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 18:14:13 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 12, Issue 8 Message-ID: <410-220041232221413968@earthlink.net> Until my bearded axe was stolen I could have shown you a nice picture of it. It is a classic Danish axe & it is very easy to thrust with. In fact one of my favorite techniques with an axe is to come slamming into the shield with the haft, then thrust in with the bleade point on the top of the axe blade. > [Original Message] > From: Peter Svensson > To: > Date: 12/21/2004 12:38:01 PM > Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 12, Issue 8 > > > Steve Perrin wrote: > > >When reading Njal's Saga (at least the Penguin > >translation that I read), do > >not let the use of the term "halberd" fool you. It's > a >case of the > >translator not knowing weaponry. Just read battleaxe > >every time you see > >halberd and you'll be fine. > > It may not have been a proper halberd, but Njal's > weapon seems to have been capable of thrusting. > Thorgrim's famous quip comes about after Njal strikes > him through a window, which is hard to do with regular > axe. > > Also, the Icelandic term for Njal's weapon was atgeir, > or "spear-axe," according to this discussion: > http://forums.swordforum.com/showthread.php?s=b5b64ccef307a37601e9202a41e6b4 32&threadid=31909&goto=nextnewest > > > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Jazz up your holiday email with celebrity designs. Learn more. > http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules From steve at perrinworlds.com Wed Dec 22 14:37:04 2004 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 19:37:04 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 12, Issue 8 References: <20041221203755.75906.qmail@web52809.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <00a501c4e7d7$a2a8e8a0$68417442@wizard> Granted. I've seen reproductions of Nordic battleaxes that had spear points. Actually, the actions of these weapons makes them seem more like naginatas than anything, but I don't think the Vikings ranged THAT far. Just don't get them confused with Swiss halberds. Steve Perrin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter Svensson" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2004 12:37 PM Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 12, Issue 8 > > Steve Perrin wrote: > > >When reading Njal's Saga (at least the Penguin > >translation that I read), do > >not let the use of the term "halberd" fool you. It's > a >case of the > >translator not knowing weaponry. Just read battleaxe > >every time you see > >halberd and you'll be fine. > > It may not have been a proper halberd, but Njal's > weapon seems to have been capable of thrusting. > Thorgrim's famous quip comes about after Njal strikes > him through a window, which is hard to do with regular > axe. > > Also, the Icelandic term for Njal's weapon was atgeir, > or "spear-axe," according to this discussion: > http://forums.swordforum.com/showthread.php?s=b5b64ccef307a37601e9202a41e6b432&threadid=31909&goto=nextnewest > > > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Jazz up your holiday email with celebrity designs. Learn more. > http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > From esoteric at crashbox.com Wed Dec 22 15:06:38 2004 From: esoteric at crashbox.com (Brad Furst) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 20:06:38 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] 2-handed weapons--gack! In-Reply-To: References: <51620.65.70.252.73.1103378760.squirrel@65.70.252.73> Message-ID: >A reasonable step, and I have thought of some weak points that could >be targeted. Be sure to loosely or strictly enforce rules of encumbrance and fatigue. As referee, you can calculate in advance a rough estimate of the values for each player character. This will at least give you an idea of the length of time within an encounter that your player-characters can fight before fatigue penalties set in. I was often lucky and spoiled. My players kept their characters lightly encumbered to such a degree that we could almost always neglect fatigue penalties, because those penalties were so many rounds into the future that the encounter would usually be over before such a time. Design your encounters with opponents that possess Rune/Divine magic. Since most all encounters are doomed to be defeated, spice up the encounter with magic. Consider, as already suggested, the spirit possessed Berserks from the Vikings. Give your opponents access to some relatively common spells like Shield or Heal Body or Heal Wound. This will then likely mean your two-handed-weapon-wielding characters will need to wound the opponents twice to defeat them. It is very reasonable for intelligent opponents to have already sacrificed for heavy magic. With or without Rune/Divine magic as well, it is reasonable for them at least to have useful spirit/battle magic to heal themselves and Protection for themselves. >However, my big concern is that they have upped the ante in "the >world" by treating these as common weapons (yeah, that was my big >mistake). If the PCs are using poleaxes, it will really bug me if the >bad guys don't have them too, fairly regularly, but I do not want to >run a high PC mortality game. In particular, I don't want my other >two players who are more into roleplaying to have *their* characters >slaughtered just so that the minimaxers face balanced opposition. To challenge the pole-axers sufficiently without risking the lesser characters of the roleplayers, then adjust the numbers of opponents. Design the encounter with plenty of extra opponents. The extras gang up on the two-handed-weapon-wielding characters as opponents should, while the the lesser characters of the roleplayers are matched against opponents singly. The extras that double-team and triple-team and surround the two-handed-weapon-wielding characters will either die quickly or wound someone such that the character can no longer use the two-handed-weapon. The extras are as if cannon-fodder, but will provide the challenge you seek just by sheer numbers. That challenge will feel satisfactory to you _and_ the players will enjoy defeating extra foes. :-) If you have too many opponents in the end and your PC party is overmatched, then have the opponents lose morale and retreat. Or have them run away to summon reinforcements. Whatever, have them leave long enough that the PC party can heal themselves. Good luck. -- Brad Furst esoteric at crashbox.com From freyrvanic at earthlink.net Wed Dec 22 15:23:34 2004 From: freyrvanic at earthlink.net (Sven Lugar) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 20:23:34 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 12, Issue 8 Message-ID: <410-220041232242334906@earthlink.net> Well, there is the tale that the Son of Holgar Danske (The Danish folk Arthur & a champion of Charlemagne - was also a historical person as opposed to Roland) had a son (not the one brained by Charlegmagne's son over a chess game) known as Prestor John (also Prester John - first mentioned in 1145 by Otto - Bishop of Friesing). Now supposedly Prestor John (leading a small band of heroes) took the secret of Viking pattern welded steel (like Damascus) along with him as he headed East & farther East, then even farther East to ultimately Japan, all the while supposedly sharing Christianity with the locals he met. This is sometimes suggested as the source of the Japanese Katana-steel technology since they never invented the screw & other technologies. http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/mandeville.html http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12400b.htm & lastly http://geography.about.com/od/historyofgeography/a/presterjohn.htm Some equate Nyse with Nippon. Other legends have him back-tracking & forming a kingdom in Africa & other legends put him India which at that time was not always differentiated from China & other Eastern lands. I tend to be dubious about it, but there is the persistant legend about it. ves thu hael, Sven > [Original Message] > From: Steve Perrin > To: ; RuneQuest rules discussion. > Date: 12/21/2004 7:39:23 PM > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Re: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 12, Issue 8 > > Granted. I've seen reproductions of Nordic battleaxes that had spear points. > Actually, the actions of these weapons makes them seem more like naginatas > than anything, but I don't think the Vikings ranged THAT far. > > Just don't get them confused with Swiss halberds. > > Steve Perrin > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Peter Svensson" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2004 12:37 PM > Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 12, Issue 8 > > > > > > Steve Perrin wrote: > > > > >When reading Njal's Saga (at least the Penguin > > >translation that I read), do > > >not let the use of the term "halberd" fool you. It's > > a >case of the > > >translator not knowing weaponry. Just read battleaxe > > >every time you see > > >halberd and you'll be fine. > > > > It may not have been a proper halberd, but Njal's > > weapon seems to have been capable of thrusting. > > Thorgrim's famous quip comes about after Njal strikes > > him through a window, which is hard to do with regular > > axe. > > > > Also, the Icelandic term for Njal's weapon was atgeir, > > or "spear-axe," according to this discussion: > > > http://forums.swordforum.com/showthread.php?s=b5b64ccef307a37601e9202a41e6b432&threadid=31909&goto=nextnewest > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > Jazz up your holiday email with celebrity designs. Learn more. > > http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > > RQ-Rules mailing list > > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules From dahak at dahak.free-online.co.uk Thu Dec 23 04:36:47 2004 From: dahak at dahak.free-online.co.uk (Adam Canning) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 17:36:47 -0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] 2-handed weapons In-Reply-To: <20041221203813.C8E26222741@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: <41C9B0AF.423.49EBA9@localhost> > Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 14:38:11 +0000 > From: bick10 at comcast.net > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] 2-handed weapons > > Actually, a > > proper minimaxer would use two weapons in alternate combats, one to do loads > > of damage and one fr cult progression, so he gets two ticks and increases > > them both. > > Pet Peeve!!!- Check hunters. Sure the players all do that to some extent. But when > it is so blatant, or worse, when drop one weapon after earning a check to use an > alternate to gain a check, I loose my cool. All of their opponents suddenly become > 20 or 40% better. sorry, sore spot there. One the other hand I've used 5 different weapons in a single running fight without reasons other than tick chasing. Bow. [Only weapon I had with the range at the start.] Switching to Javelin when the ranged closed [I had a better skill with them] then a lance charge [dropped when it impaled] followed by melee with a sword and then after that was broken a mace. Assuming you don't count the battle trained horse I was riding as a weapon as well. :) -- Adam "I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully." George W Bush From jurrubin at earthlink.net Thu Dec 23 04:55:46 2004 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 11:55:46 -0600 (GMT-06:00) Subject: [RQ-Rules] 2-handed weapons Message-ID: <33077219.1103738146452.JavaMail.root@waldorf.psp.pas.earthlink.net> I've done something similar for similar reasons but ended using Fist Attack/Grappling/Martial Arts when my weapon broke. The GM was quite impressed with my character's flexibility. I was equally impressed my character survived. David Smart -----Original Message----- From: Adam Canning Sent: Dec 22, 2004 11:36 AM To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] 2-handed weapons One the other hand I've used 5 different weapons in a single running fight without reasons other than tick chasing. From bick10 at comcast.net Thu Dec 23 05:30:59 2004 From: bick10 at comcast.net (bick10 at comcast.net) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 18:30:59 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] 2-handed weapons Message-ID: <122220041830.21226.41C9BD63000476D7000052EA2206998499CFCE050C070D@comcast.net> :Adam Canning > One the other hand I've used 5 different weapons in a single running fight > without > reasons other than tick chasing. Let me see if I am getting this right? You are admitting to changing weapons in a fight for the sole purpose to gain weapon skill checks? Not because the situation dictated it? Is this step one of a 12 step program for power gaming anonymous. "Hi, my name is John X, and I am a Power Gamer." "Hello John X."... If you did tick chase for a single fight, no problem. When it is standard operating procedure, then I have a problem. > Bow. [Only weapon I had with the range at the start.] No problem. As a matter of fact, I always tell to my players that they will want a range weapon. Even if thrown. > Switching to Javelin when the ranged closed [I had a better skill with them] Okay, I can deal with it. I do question the Bow - Javelin combination. But I am sure there is a good reason. > then a > lance charge [dropped when it impaled] And rightly so. You surly don't want to dismount to pull the lance out. Go for the back up weapon. > followed by melee with a sword and then The old favorite. > after that was broken a mace. Better than a knife as your only back up melee weapon. Beside, the horse was probably caring all that weapon encumbrance. > Assuming you don't count the battle trained horse I was riding as a weapon as > well. :) Yes it is. So that makes 6 weapons by my count. With that chain of fighting weapons, you would not have activated my Pet Peeve-dar. It is when the player starts out with Spear and shield with sword as back up. Attacks and parries using only the 1-handed spear until he gains a tick with in Spear Attack and Spear parry, then starts to use the shield for parry, drops the spear and draws the sword to attack. Once the shield earns a parry tick, then parry with sword as well as attack. That sort of play will activate my Pet Peeve Revenge Mode. > David Smart > I've done something similar for similar reasons but ended using Fist > Attack/Grappling/Martial Arts when my weapon broke. The GM was quite impressed > with my character's flexibility. > > I was equally impressed my character survived. Had a PC with a Hoplite as last man standing against Zombies. He dropped the spear and used Shield Bash and Fist to finally win. Plenty of reasons to switch weapons. Tick hunting is not one of them. Jim From jurrubin at earthlink.net Thu Dec 23 05:44:08 2004 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 12:44:08 -0600 (GMT-06:00) Subject: [RQ-Rules] 2-handed weapons Message-ID: <15629100.1103741049056.JavaMail.root@bigbird.psp.pas.earthlink.net> I'm with you on this one, Jim. David Smart -----Original Message----- From: bick10 at comcast.net Sent: Dec 22, 2004 12:30 PM To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] 2-handed weapons Had a PC with a Hoplite as last man standing against Zombies. He dropped the spear and used Shield Bash and Fist to finally win. Plenty of reasons to switch weapons. Tick hunting is not one of them. Jim From carpgachair at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 05:53:46 2004 From: carpgachair at yahoo.com (Paul Cardwell) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 10:53:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] 2-handed weapons In-Reply-To: <122220041830.21226.41C9BD63000476D7000052EA2206998499CFCE050C070D@comcast.net> Message-ID: <20041222185346.68712.qmail@web51301.mail.yahoo.com> --- bick10 at comcast.net wrote: > > Switching to Javelin when the ranged closed [I had > a better skill with them] > > Okay, I can deal with it. I do question the Bow - > Javelin combination. But I am sure there is a good > reason. Historically, Scythians used the bow at distance, then switched to javelin closer in, using a second javelin as a lance up close, then to the sword as it disolved into a melee. Having a gorytos (combination bow case and quiver), they could stash the bow and draw the shield with its attached javelins in a RQ/Mythworld five action ranks (but still have the javelin's action ranks yet to go). This was in situations of small skirmishes rather than set-piece battles in which they rotated horse-archers until the enemy had rather ragged lines, then went with cataphrats and lances and client-state infantry to mop up. Paul Cardwell __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From bick10 at comcast.net Thu Dec 23 06:45:03 2004 From: bick10 at comcast.net (bick10 at comcast.net) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 19:45:03 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] 2-handed weapons Message-ID: <122220041945.7897.41C9CEBE000E195E00001ED92200734830CFCE050C070D@comcast.net> > Paul Cardwell > Historically, Scythians used the bow at distance, then > switched to javelin closer in, using a second javelin > as a lance up close, then to the sword as it disolved > into a melee. And that is why I only questioned the Bow - Javelin combination. I knew I would get a knowledgeable person to give a RW reason for it. Thanks Paul. You say 5 action ranks to ready the shield with javelins per RQ/Myth World. I assume you also mean SR?s. So that is 2 SR?s more than the 3 usual to draw and ready. Does that account for an awkwardness of the javelins? Jim From soltakss at yahoo.com Thu Dec 23 08:08:33 2004 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (Simon Phipp) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 21:08:33 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Lots of Ticks In-Reply-To: <20041222185416.48C1522273C@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: <20041222210833.66163.qmail@web51010.mail.yahoo.com> > > > Actually, a > > > proper minimaxer would use two weapons in alternate combats, one to do > loads > > > of damage and one fr cult progression, so he gets two ticks and > increases > > > them both. > > > > Pet Peeve!!!- Check hunters. Sure the players all do that to some > extent. But when > > it is so blatant, or worse, when drop one weapon after earning a check to > use an > > alternate to gain a check, I loose my cool. All of their opponents > suddenly become > > 20 or 40% better. sorry, sore spot there. > > One the other hand I've used 5 different weapons in a single running fight > without > reasons other than tick chasing. > > Bow. [Only weapon I had with the range at the start.] Adam: > Switching to Javelin when the ranged closed [I had a better skill with > them] then a > lance charge [dropped when it impaled] followed by melee with a sword and > then after > that was broken a mace. > > Assuming you don't count the battle trained horse I was riding as a weapon > as well. :) We had a PC called Trog who was a minotaur with an INT of 6 (in RQ2). Because he had a ridiculously small chance of increasing skills, he was allowed to tick-chase on his weapons. This meant that a typical combat went like this: LH Mace Attack/RH Mace Parry RH Mace Attack/LH Mace Parry Is he dead? No??? I'll have to change weapons. One round to change weapons, taking damage on his armour and hoping not to go into Battle Rage. LH Battle Axe Attack/RH Flail Parry RH Flail Attack/LH Battle Axe Parry Is he dead? No??? I'll have to change weapons. One round to change weapons, taking damage on his armour and hoping not to go into Battle Rage. Repeat with assorted weapons. Before you all faint or have an attack of apoplexy, he had a few disadvantages: INT 6 so he had a 6% chance of increasing his skills (past 100%) If he specialled or better he went into Battle Rage (Big Problem) If he took damage in the weapo changing round, or anytime else, he went into Battle Rage (Big Problem) He had about 15 points of natural (magically increased) skin and armour, loads of HPs and was big and strong, so when he went into Battle Rage, everyone ran away, leaving him to fight the PCs. He had POW 18 and a 10 point Resistor, so he resisted attempts to bring him out of Battle Rage at POW 28, so when he went loopy he pretty much stayed loopy until everything near him was dead. We rules that he couldn't change weapons while in Battle Rage, as that was pushinjg it a bit. He didn't mind, though. See Ya Simon ___________________________________________________________ ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From pontus.amberg at bredband.net Thu Dec 23 09:49:22 2004 From: pontus.amberg at bredband.net (Pontus Amberg) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 23:49:22 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest In-Reply-To: <006001c4d68b$847eb0b0$68417442@wizard> References: <006001c4d68b$847eb0b0$68417442@wizard> Message-ID: <41C9F9F2.9070205@bredband.net> The idea of adding your skill and the D100 roll is pretty interesting but it would be even simpler to record the chance of failure on the character sheet? This is the same system but the calculation (that might slow the game down a bit) have already been done on the character sheet. So if a character has a 55% chance of succeeding with a skill the character sheet would have 45 written on it. A player then know that a roll of 45 or more is needed for success and a roll of 45 is a critical. /Pontus Steve Perrin wrote: >A lot of people like RQ's and its derived systems' focus on "rolling low" to >succeed. Others prefer the rolling high concepts of D&D and other games. > >In a playtest of the FANGS game, I've been dealing with a system of rolling >high with a d20 that has inspired me to look again at the RQ/BRP core >system. > >Assume, if you will, that the goal is to be 100% in effect. You are trained >to, say, 55% with your weapon, but you want to be 100% with this particular >blow. You can only rely on chance... > >Which is to say, that the method of deriving success is to roll the d100 and >add your current skill. If your combined roll equals 100 or more, you are >successful. A critical could be a total combined roll of 100, exactly. Not >sure what to do about a special, though. > >Now, this jibes better with SPQR's system of successes. Off the top of my >head, 100+ is one success, 125+ is two successes, 150+ is 3 successes, etc. >Various adders and subtracters make such rolls more or less likely. >Something similar could be done with specials in regular RQ, but it means >that, for instance, characters with really bad rolls would never have the >chance of getting a special. > >Think about it, run a couple of practice combats, let me know what you >think. > >Steve Perrin > >_______________________________________________ >RQ-Rules mailing list >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com >http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules >http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > > > From dahak at dahak.free-online.co.uk Thu Dec 23 10:37:47 2004 From: dahak at dahak.free-online.co.uk (Adam Canning) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 23:37:47 -0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 12, Issue 10 In-Reply-To: <20041222185416.A00E4222744@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: <41CA054B.19178.4C790C@localhost> On 22 Dec 2004 at 10:54, rq-rules-request at crashbox.com wrote: > > Switching to Javelin when the ranged closed [I had a better skill with them] > > Okay, I can deal with it. I do question the Bow - Javelin combination. But I am sure there is a good reason. Composite Bows outrange Javelins by almost 200m. Even using Mobility and Invigorate a half plate armoured horse takes multiple combat rounds to close that gap. Even at only 40% Bow that's worth doing to make it more difficult to spot which of the party is the bowmaster [and spending the round before hiting 50m swapping to Javelin at 95% made sense to me.] I got a tick with both weapons, but I also took down at least one more barbarian than I would have done using only one of the two. Where do you draw the line? I chose to carry a mace rather than a second sword as a backup weapon. You might justly accuse my horse of tickchasing because it frequently used disruption. But there aren't really all that many other ranged attack spells it could have learned. -- Adam "I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully." George W Bush From steve at perrinworlds.com Thu Dec 23 15:53:04 2004 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 20:53:04 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest References: <006001c4d68b$847eb0b0$68417442@wizard> <41C9F9F2.9070205@bredband.net> Message-ID: <012601c4e8ab$683a0120$68417442@wizard> Interesting approach. Not sure it would be intuitive enough for me, but it would be simpler if one is trained. Of course, if one is worrying about additional successes... No, not bad. One could just add 25 to the 45 and see that a special (or another success) comes along with a roll of 70, and then 95... I'll have to think about it some more. Steve ----- Original Message ----- From: "Pontus Amberg" To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2004 2:49 PM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Determining success in RuneQuest > The idea of adding your skill and the D100 roll is pretty interesting > but it would be even simpler to record the chance of failure on the > character sheet? This is the same system but the calculation (that might > slow the game down a bit) have already been done on the character sheet. > So if a character has a 55% chance of succeeding with a skill the > character sheet would have 45 written on it. A player then know that a > roll of 45 or more is needed for success and a roll of 45 is a critical. > > /Pontus > > Steve Perrin wrote: > > >A lot of people like RQ's and its derived systems' focus on "rolling low" to > >succeed. Others prefer the rolling high concepts of D&D and other games. > > > >In a playtest of the FANGS game, I've been dealing with a system of rolling > >high with a d20 that has inspired me to look again at the RQ/BRP core > >system. > > > >Assume, if you will, that the goal is to be 100% in effect. You are trained > >to, say, 55% with your weapon, but you want to be 100% with this particular > >blow. You can only rely on chance... > > > >Which is to say, that the method of deriving success is to roll the d100 and > >add your current skill. If your combined roll equals 100 or more, you are > >successful. A critical could be a total combined roll of 100, exactly. Not > >sure what to do about a special, though. > > > >Now, this jibes better with SPQR's system of successes. Off the top of my > >head, 100+ is one success, 125+ is two successes, 150+ is 3 successes, etc. > >Various adders and subtracters make such rolls more or less likely. > >Something similar could be done with specials in regular RQ, but it means > >that, for instance, characters with really bad rolls would never have the > >chance of getting a special. > > > >Think about it, run a couple of practice combats, let me know what you > >think. > > > >Steve Perrin > > > >_______________________________________________ > >RQ-Rules mailing list > >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > >http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > >http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules From s.francois2 at wanadoo.fr Thu Dec 23 16:27:08 2004 From: s.francois2 at wanadoo.fr (=?windows-1252?Q?St=E9phane_FRANCOIS?=) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 06:27:08 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] 2-handed weapons In-Reply-To: <122220041945.7897.41C9CEBE000E195E00001ED92200734830CFCE050C070D@comcast.net> References: <122220041945.7897.41C9CEBE000E195E00001ED92200734830CFCE050C070D@comcast.net> Message-ID: <41CA572C.7090102@wanadoo.fr> >And that is why I only questioned the Bow - Javelin combination. I knew I would get a knowledgeable person to give a RW reason for it. Thanks Paul. > >You say 5 action ranks to ready the shield with javelins per RQ/Myth World. I assume you also mean SR?s. So that is 2 SR?s more than the 3 usual to draw and ready. Does that account for an awkwardness of the javelins? > >Jim > > I think the two extra SRs are for stashing the bow properly, not simply dropping it on the ground - a bow is too expensive to be treated this casually. From bick10 at comcast.net Thu Dec 23 16:53:19 2004 From: bick10 at comcast.net (bick10 at comcast.net) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 05:53:19 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 12, Issue 10 Message-ID: <122320040553.26074.41CA5D4E0005B9E4000065DA2206999735CFCE050C070D@comcast.net> > On 22 Dec 2004 at 10:54, rq-rules-request at crashbox.com wrote: > > > > Switching to Javelin when the ranged closed [I had a better skill with them] > > > > Okay, I can deal with it. I do question the Bow - Javelin combination. But I am sure there is a good reason. Adam > Composite Bows outrange Javelins by almost 200m. Even using > Mobility and Invigorate a half plate armoured horse takes multiple > combat rounds to close that gap. Even at only 40% Bow that's worth > doing to make it more difficult to spot which of the party is the > bowmaster [and spending the round before hiting 50m swapping to > Javelin at 95% made sense to me.] Good reason. As I didn't know the details, I questioned it. Now I know and I would not have had a problem GMing that. > I got a tick with both weapons, but I also took down at least one more > barbarian than I would have done using only one of the two. Good tatics then. > Where do you draw the line? I chose to carry a mace rather than a > second sword as a backup weapon. It is a very broad line. Short answer, What is reasonable. Foot man with long bow, hoplite shield, long spear, two handed axe, javelins, bastard sword and throwing knives I draw the line. But a horseman, with bow, javelin, lance, sword, and mace. Okay. Most of that is probably carried by the horse anyway. > You might justly accuse my horse of tickchasing because it frequently > used disruption. > > But there aren't really all that many other ranged attack spells it could > have learned. So your horse is a horse of a deferent color... :-) You might want to look into palsy. Freeze the legs making the trample all the more easy, and fun. From bick10 at comcast.net Thu Dec 23 16:56:59 2004 From: bick10 at comcast.net (bick10 at comcast.net) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 05:56:59 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] 2-handed weapons Message-ID: <122320040556.10032.41CA5E2A000750D9000027302200761438CFCE050C070D@comcast.net> > >You say 5 action ranks to ready the shield with javelins per RQ/Myth World. I > assume you also mean SR?s. So that is 2 SR?s more than the 3 usual to draw and > ready. Does that account for an awkwardness of the javelins? > > > >Jim > > St?phane > I think the two extra SRs are for stashing the bow properly, not simply > dropping it on the ground - a bow is too expensive to be treated this > casually. Okay. But I did have an archer once that would fire the bow until the last, throw it behind him and use Repair spell latter to kiss and make up with it. From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Thu Dec 23 19:54:30 2004 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 08:54:30 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] 2-handed weapons Message-ID: >> Paul Cardwell >> Historically, Scythians used the bow at distance, then >> switched to javelin closer in, using a second javelin >> as a lance up close, then to the sword as it dissolved >> into a melee. > >And that is why I only questioned the Bow - Javelin combination. I knew I would get a knowledgeable person to give >a RW reason for it. Thanks Paul. > >You say 5 action ranks to ready the shield with javelins per RQ/Myth World. I assume you also mean SR's. So that >is 2 SR's more than the 3 usual to draw and ready. Does that account for an awkwardness of the javelins? I assume Paul's Mythworld stuck to the RQII 12SR/round, which used 5SR between actions, as opposed to RQIII/IV's 3SR between actions? Cheers, Nick Middleton From aescleal at btinternet.com Thu Dec 23 20:02:30 2004 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (ASHLEY MUNDAY) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 09:02:30 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] 2-handed weapons In-Reply-To: <41CA572C.7090102@wanadoo.fr> Message-ID: <20041223090230.65800.qmail@web86211.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> I was under the impression that sheathing/drawing a weapon took 3SR (5SR in RQ2). If you wanted to stash a bow(3SR), unsling a shield (3SR, 6SR if it was in an inaccessible place) ready a javellin (3SR) it would take most people a couple of rounds to manage that. Cheers, Ash --- St?phane FRANCOIS wrote: > > >And that is why I only questioned the Bow - Javelin > combination. I knew I would get a knowledgeable > person to give a RW reason for it. Thanks Paul. > > > >You say 5 action ranks to ready the shield with > javelins per RQ/Myth World. I assume you also mean > SR?s. So that is 2 SR?s more than the 3 usual to > draw and ready. Does that account for an > awkwardness of the javelins? > > > >Jim > > > > > I think the two extra SRs are for stashing the bow > properly, not simply > dropping it on the ground - a bow is too expensive > to be treated this > casually. > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > From lancelot at inetnebr.com Fri Dec 24 21:44:48 2004 From: lancelot at inetnebr.com (lance dyas) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 04:44:48 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] 2-handed weapons In-Reply-To: <122320040556.10032.41CA5E2A000750D9000027302200761438CFCE050C070D@comcast.net> References: <122320040556.10032.41CA5E2A000750D9000027302200761438CFCE050C070D@comcast.net> Message-ID: <41CBF320.6040806@inetnebr.com> bick10 at comcast.net wrote: >>>You say 5 action ranks to ready the shield with javelins per RQ/Myth World. I >>> >>> >>assume you also mean SR?s. So that is 2 SR?s more than the 3 usual to draw and >>ready. Does that account for an awkwardness of the javelins? >> >> >>>Jim >>> >>> >>> > >St?phane > > >>I think the two extra SRs are for stashing the bow properly, not simply >>dropping it on the ground - a bow is too expensive to be treated this >>casually. >> >> > >Okay. But I did have an archer once that would fire the bow until the last, throw it behind him and use Repair spell latter to kiss and make up with it. > > > That seems a valid battle field tactic in a world with reliable repair spells. -- Google Me at : Decision Driven Rolegaming -- Lance Dyas Destiny the Hand of Fate - at the Decision Driven Gaming Center http://www.dyasdesigns.com/roleplay/Fate/StrategicEdge.pdf From jurrubin at earthlink.net Fri Dec 24 03:57:08 2004 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (D. Smart) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 10:57:08 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] 2-handed weapons In-Reply-To: <41CBF320.6040806@inetnebr.com> References: <122320040556.10032.41CA5E2A000750D9000027302200761438CFCE050C070D@comcast.net> <41CBF320.6040806@inetnebr.com> Message-ID: <41CAF8E4.5050806@earthlink.net> No kidding. Even without a reliable Repair spell, I still throw a bow out of the way to get a sword out in time. I can always replace the bow easier than a leg or arm (or head). David lance dyas wrote: > bick10 at comcast.net wrote: > >> Okay. But I did have an archer once that would fire the bow until >> the last, throw it behind him and use Repair spell latter to kiss and >> make up with it. >> > That seems a valid battle field tactic in a world with reliable repair > spells. From gianni at basicrps.com Fri Dec 24 03:05:45 2004 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 17:05:45 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] 2-handed weapons In-Reply-To: <41CAF8E4.5050806@earthlink.net> References: <122320040556.10032.41CA5E2A000750D9000027302200761438CFCE050C070D@comcast.net> <41CBF320.6040806@inetnebr.com> <41CAF8E4.5050806@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <1103817945.41caecd924847@imp.webhuset.no> Hi gang Quoting "D. Smart" : > >> Okay. But I did have an archer once that would fire the bow until > >> the last, throw it behind him and use Repair spell latter to kiss and > >> make up with it. > >> > > That seems a valid battle field tactic in a world with reliable repair > > spells. > No kidding. Even without a reliable Repair spell, I still throw a bow > out of the way to get a sword out in time. I can always replace the bow > easier than a leg or arm (or head). Well, RW steppe nomads had composite bows especially made for them (in terms of strength, eye-to-hand distance, etc.) which needed months to be made by specialist bowyers. In RQ terms, such a bow would probably be MORE expensive than a healing spell... Gianni From jurrubin at earthlink.net Fri Dec 24 04:17:50 2004 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (D. Smart) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 11:17:50 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] 2-handed weapons In-Reply-To: <1103817945.41caecd924847@imp.webhuset.no> References: <122320040556.10032.41CA5E2A000750D9000027302200761438CFCE050C070D@comcast.net> <41CBF320.6040806@inetnebr.com> <41CAF8E4.5050806@earthlink.net> <1103817945.41caecd924847@imp.webhuset.no> Message-ID: <41CAFDBE.6080505@earthlink.net> Yeah, but you're assuming there'll be time for healing. _Nothing_ is more expensive for a person than his/her own death. David Gianni wrote: >Hi gang > >Quoting "D. Smart" : > > >>No kidding. Even without a reliable Repair spell, I still throw a bow >>out of the way to get a sword out in time. I can always replace the bow >>easier than a leg or arm (or head). >> >> > >Well, RW steppe nomads had composite bows especially made for them (in terms of >strength, eye-to-hand distance, etc.) which needed months to be made by >specialist bowyers. > >In RQ terms, such a bow would probably be MORE expensive than a healing spell... > > From carpgachair at yahoo.com Fri Dec 24 05:02:29 2004 From: carpgachair at yahoo.com (Paul Cardwell) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 10:02:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] 2-handed weapons In-Reply-To: <41CBF320.6040806@inetnebr.com> Message-ID: <20041223180229.64290.qmail@web51302.mail.yahoo.com> I should have said SR/AR since RQ and Mythworld have different terms for the same thing. In Mythworld, all actions (even Make Fire, Pack Cargo, Tumble, etc.) have action ranks. There is also a Change Weapon skill, specific for each from...to..., in which the five SR/AR rule applies to both the putting up of one and the simultaneous draw of the other. However, a miss adds five to the usual five for each, and a fumble drops both. There is also an Iajitsu fast-draw skill in which a sheathed weapon can be drawn and ready for action in one plus the usual SR/AR for that weapon. It has the same penalty for miss and fumble as Change Weapon. The five was from the RQ2 rules, which was what I was playing when I proposed what became Mythworld to be RQ3. Even though I refereed the first public demo of RQ3 at Origins 84, I never played that version regularly, having already gone on to Mythworld (which I demonstrated the next day at Origins 84). The new Mythworld revision (now in testplay) has reduced the change target penalty to three, and I will test the three SR/AR for possible inclusion in Mythworld's new expansion. Thanks for the tip. Awkwardness of long weapons such as javelin, pole arms, greatsword, etc. gives an effective ENC for their bulkiness (such as moving through woods or indoors, but not open ground or the ENC of a boat or wagon), but one skilled in that weapon is not likely to be inconvenienced significantly in moving it about. I agree about dropping the bow, which is why I prefer characters who use a gorytos. :-) Paul Cardwell --- lance dyas wrote: > bick10 at comcast.net wrote: > > >>>You say 5 action ranks to ready the shield with > javelins per RQ/Myth World. I > >>> > >>> > >>assume you also mean SR?s. So that is 2 SR?s more > than the 3 usual to draw and > >>ready. Does that account for an awkwardness of > the javelins? > >> > >> > >>>Jim > >>> > >>> > >>> > > > >St?phane > > > > > >>I think the two extra SRs are for stashing the bow > properly, not simply > >>dropping it on the ground - a bow is too expensive > to be treated this > >>casually. > >> > >> > > > >Okay. But I did have an archer once that would > fire the bow until the last, throw it behind him and > use Repair spell latter to kiss and make up with it. > > > > > > > > That seems a valid battle field tactic in a world > with reliable repair > spells. > > -- > Google Me at : Decision Driven Rolegaming > > -- Lance Dyas > Destiny the Hand of Fate - at the Decision Driven > Gaming Center > http://www.dyasdesigns.com/roleplay/Fate/StrategicEdge.pdf > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From bick10 at comcast.net Fri Dec 24 05:13:00 2004 From: bick10 at comcast.net (bick10 at comcast.net) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 18:13:00 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] 2-handed weapons Message-ID: <122320041813.8801.41CB0AAC00088C7B000022612200734076CFCE050C070D@comcast.net> > Yeah, but you're assuming there'll be time for healing. > > _Nothing_ is more expensive for a person than his/her own death. Now to take the other side of this, there are people that consider objects more important than their own life. Also, young, brash warriors probably wouldn't consider that they will loose. So it is conceivable that they would put their lives in threat by carefully putting away the bow. Add to that a cultrial or mystical link to the bow, and they surely would take care in sheathing the bow. I once played an RQ elf with a living bow. That bow was more valuable than his life. And I played it that way. But I also played a warrior that considered his weapons as tools and was willing to discard them with little concern. Also, I keep forgetting RQ2 Strike Ranks. As I played RQ3. So 5 is fine to sheath. But as a GM I would then charge the SR again to draw and ready another weapon. And in RQ3 there is alway the Dex SR to add to actions... Jim From gianni at basicrps.com Mon Dec 27 20:11:52 2004 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 10:11:52 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Halflings Message-ID: <1104138712.41cfd1d875172@imp.webhuset.no> Hi gang Anybody ever tried using halflings in a Gloranthan RQ adventure? cheers Gianni From gianni at basicrps.com Mon Dec 27 22:39:34 2004 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 12:39:34 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] French RQ Message-ID: <1104147574.41cff476ccf93@imp.webhuset.no> Hi Does anybody have the French version of RQIII? I have a question about it. Cheers Gianni From talmeta at talmeta.net Tue Dec 28 01:12:43 2004 From: talmeta at talmeta.net (Tal Meta) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 09:12:43 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Halflings In-Reply-To: <1104138712.41cfd1d875172@imp.webhuset.no> References: <1104138712.41cfd1d875172@imp.webhuset.no> Message-ID: <41D0185B.5060805@talmeta.net> Gianni wrote: > Hi gang > > Anybody ever tried using halflings in a Gloranthan RQ adventure? Not Gloranthan, no. But we used them in my Greyhawk campaign. -- talmeta at talmeta.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine AIM - talmeta ICQ - 12594453 Homepage - I hear the sound that the machines make, and feel my heart break, just for a moment. From jurrubin at earthlink.net Tue Dec 28 01:56:59 2004 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 08:56:59 -0600 (GMT-06:00) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Halflings Message-ID: <13379009.1104159419192.JavaMail.root@gonzo.psp.pas.earthlink.net> Just think of them as non-swimming, wingless ducks. Gianni wrote: > Hi gang > > Anybody ever tried using halflings in a Gloranthan RQ adventure? From s.francois2 at wanadoo.fr Tue Dec 28 02:11:42 2004 From: s.francois2 at wanadoo.fr (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?St=E9phane_FRANCOIS?=) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 16:11:42 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] French RQ In-Reply-To: <1104147574.41cff476ccf93@imp.webhuset.no> References: <1104147574.41cff476ccf93@imp.webhuset.no> Message-ID: <41D0262E.8090308@wanadoo.fr> Gianni a ?crit : >Hi > >Does anybody have the French version of RQIII? I have a question about it. > >Cheers > >Gianni > > > Yes I have it (pretty normal, I'm French !). Ask your question (privately or on the list) and I'll do my best to answer it. From bick10 at comcast.net Tue Dec 28 05:50:38 2004 From: bick10 at comcast.net (bick10 at comcast.net) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 18:50:38 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Halflings Message-ID: <122720041850.4930.41D0597E000911B0000013422200761438CFCE050C070D@comcast.net> > Gianni > Anybody ever tried using halflings in a Gloranthan RQ adventure? Yes, I did. Well, one of my players did. I decided that they were considered one of the (I think they are called) Beastmen. That based them in Dragon's Pass. They fought against the Lunars as Slingers and of course were on the loosing side. When the Ducks were blamed for the uprising, they were also involved, and helped blame the Ducks to prevent any major fallout on them. Since then they have fragmented and groups have spread East and South. Those that travel have taken a more merchant role in society while those that remain in DP tried to keep with there farming/hunting roots. There is a community of Haflings in Pavis, working as merchants and middle men. As a community they try to keep a low profile and seek to increase profit, not political capital. The Halflings are adaptors. They adapt their communities to those that are in control. Currently in DP, the Lunars inability to completely reduce the Orlanths into subjugation has them caught in the middle. Once a clear winner is decided, they will adapt completely to their new masters. In their eyes, it is not cowardly, but survival. The tree bends, and does not break. Most Halflings worship the Orlanth pathion. The Hero Halfling we had was an master with the sling, very good with the short sword, and a great dodger. Refused to ride the back of an animal if it could be avoided. Hope you have fun. Oh, and I ignore the Glorantha book where it says what creatures don't belong in the world. There was Orcs too. Jim From leonbk at yahoo.com Tue Dec 28 06:23:05 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 11:23:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Halflings In-Reply-To: <122720041850.4930.41D0597E000911B0000013422200761438CFCE050C070D@comcast.net> Message-ID: <20041227192305.99728.qmail@web41106.mail.yahoo.com> > Gianni > Anybody ever tried using halflings in a Gloranthan > RQ adventure? We did as well, but our groups have a history of jumping from Glorantha to other worlds and back to Glorantha. Two notable halfling characters (played by the same person) come to mind, one Bobbit Butwhipe a Bastard of Eurmal (Rune Lord) had finally put to rest while on a Light Bringer HeroQuest in Hell to retrieve a slain Yelm Imperitor. He actually has a shrine there now, which a source of the Eurmal Spell 'Remove Face'. The second was a Humakti Acolyte (do not remeber his name), who died fighting Delecti. He grabed the Lead Cross which was dropped by a dead Humakti Sword and was hit by about 6 Sever Spirits from the vampires we were fighting. He succeed in his divine intervention and was made into a short sword, which the party dragged around for a while. ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do? http://my.yahoo.com From gianni at basicrps.com Tue Dec 28 06:55:37 2004 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 20:55:37 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Halflings In-Reply-To: <20041227192305.99728.qmail@web41106.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041227192305.99728.qmail@web41106.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1104177337.41d068b93a7d3@imp.webhuset.no> Thank you Jim and Leon with the cool ideas. I was thinking myself of having Hobbits in Tarsh (my campaign is centred in Tarsh and having Hobbits would lure my children to playing RQ). I am not into following blindly the Written Gospel of Greg Stafford, but I was thinking 'Hobbits' would be too much. My idea is the following: at one of the battles between the (originally Orlanthi) Tarshites and the Lunars, one of Tarshite clans chickened out and left the battle field, causing the Lunars to win. The defeated Tarshite king then cursed them, and as a consequence they only bore midget children afterwards (? la human trollkin). This now forgotten clan, the Hobbits, then sought shelter in the sparsely populated hills and marshes west of the Oslir. The hill Hobbits live in holes. The marsh Hobbits live in houses built on stilts. They are still Orlanthi but resent their having been cursed by an Orlanthi king. As a consequence, some of them have turned to the Provincial Church of the Seven Mothers. There is a prophecy amongst the Hobbits that a hero should arise one day to lift their curse. Comments are welcome. Cheers Gianni From gkahla at chromebob.com Tue Dec 28 08:00:54 2004 From: gkahla at chromebob.com (Gerall Kahla) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 15:00:54 -0600 (CST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Halflings Message-ID: <32810.24.125.128.221.1104181254.squirrel@24.125.128.221> > Thank you Jim and Leon with the cool ideas. I was thinking myself of > having > Hobbits in Tarsh (my campaign is centred in Tarsh and having Hobbits would > lure > my children to playing RQ). I am not into following blindly the Written > Gospel > of Greg Stafford, but I was thinking 'Hobbits' would be too much. most people i'm aware of that follow Greg's creation to the letter are now playing HeroQuest - because Greg said so. this is fine with me... i'm more interested in the system than the world it was attached to. [snip] *removing a cool Halfling-integration myth* > The hill Hobbits live in holes. The marsh Hobbits live in houses built on > stilts. They are still Orlanthi but resent their having been cursed by an > Orlanthi king. As a consequence, some of them have turned to the > Provincial Church of the Seven Mothers. this is fantastic! i grew up on the coastline of the Gulf of Mexico. beach-houses are still built on stilts today - as well as the little shacks and small homes in the swamps of Louisiana. these are fantastic images! excellent work! > There is a prophecy amongst the Hobbits that > a hero should arise one day to lift their curse. of course there is! it should be interesting to see how this divides the emergent culture; the Lunar converts may just thumb their noses at the idea of being 'cured'... altogether, this is a well-reasoned and creative application of the species for Glorantha. thanks for sharing it. on a more nuts-and-bolts level, i should warn you that playing a halfling under the RQ3 rules (where SIZ accounts for half your hit points) can be a little deadly. goodness knows my halfling naturalist/sorcerer faces innumerable challenges because of his HP average... halflings learn early to keep their opponents at range - if they don't, they get to suffer from blows which have a *damage bonus*. halflings who are lucky get no damage bonus. pax omnium veritas -- -- be warned, fair traveller; there are no maps for these territories. Gerall Kahla / gkahla / autom4tic [http://chromebob.com/] From leonbk at yahoo.com Tue Dec 28 09:00:57 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 14:00:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Halflings In-Reply-To: <32810.24.125.128.221.1104181254.squirrel@24.125.128.221> Message-ID: <20041227220057.88240.qmail@web41110.mail.yahoo.com> --- Gerall Kahla wrote: > [snip] > *removing a cool Halfling-integration myth* > > The hill Hobbits live in holes. The marsh Hobbits > live in houses built on > > stilts. They are still Orlanthi but resent their > having been cursed by an > > Orlanthi king. As a consequence, some of them have > turned to the > > Provincial Church of the Seven Mothers. Based on this background, I would say they should have turned away from worship of Orlanth to spirit worshipping. > on a more nuts-and-bolts level, i should warn you > that playing a halfling > under the RQ3 rules (where SIZ accounts for half > your hit points) can be a > little deadly. goodness knows my halfling > naturalist/sorcerer faces > innumerable challenges because of his HP average... True, but at the same time their Stealth modifier is going to be great because of their small SIZ. > halflings learn early to keep their opponents at > range - if they don't, > they get to suffer from blows which have a *damage > bonus*. halflings who are lucky get no damage bonus. Spells like Firearrow and Fireblade shold be standard for Halfling warriors and adventurers. ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From pmj at comhem.se Tue Dec 28 13:06:07 2004 From: pmj at comhem.se (Peter Johansson) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 03:06:07 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] On the Damage of Bows In-Reply-To: <20041227220057.88240.qmail@web41110.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041227220057.88240.qmail@web41110.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41D0BF8F.5070201@comhem.se> Hi! We had a discussion on bows in my gaming group a few months back and it made me ponder on the damage that a bow makes. The main point in the discussions were that rather than having, for instance, a normal damage of 1D8+1 for all Comp bows and adding half a persons damage bonus, a bow should have a damage in relation to the strength/pull of the bow: Str: 13 => 1d8+1 Str: 14 => 1d8+1d2 Str: 15 => 1d8+1d3 Str: 16 => 1d8+1d4 Str: 17 => 1d8+1d5 Str: 18 => 1d8+1d6 Str is the Strength a person need to be able use the bow. A person with lesser strenght cannot use it and a person with greater strength cannot get more damage out of it because the bow cannot be pulled more than it is built for. Questions that immediately springs to mind are: 1) Is this table realistic? 2) Will it make bows overly powerful for strong PC:s? (An average impale would do 22 hits with a Str 18 bow) There are several ways of putting limits on stronger bows, of course: 1) The standard bow, readily available in every corner shop are made for Str 13. If you need a stronger bow, it has to be specially made, costing more and taking time. 2) Maybe stronger bows (e.g. bows with Str over 15) need certain rare materials making them rare to find and/or really expensive. 3) Maybe stronger bows are more brittle? 4) Maybe stronger bows need master craftsmen to work properly? Comments from anyone familiar with bows in this forum is very welcome... and everyone else too of course. :-) /Peter J From DevinC at aol.com Tue Dec 28 13:10:34 2004 From: DevinC at aol.com (DevinC at aol.com) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 21:10:34 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] On the Damage of Bows Message-ID: <1a6.2e1c32b2.2f021a9a@aol.com> I wonder. Can a Str 13 person still pull a Str 16 bow enough to get some Str bonus? In 3rd edition D&D it works like this: A given bow is constructed with a certain Str bonus. You can apply your Str bonus up to the constructed bonus. You always apply a Str penalty. So, let's say Mr. A has a +2 Str bonus and picks up a +1 Str bow. He can fire it with a +1 to damage. If Mr. A picks up a +3 Str bow, he can fire it for a +2 bonus to damage. If Mr. B has a Str penalty of -1, he can still pick up A +0 Str bow, a +1 Str bow, or even a +3 Str bow, but he fires all of them with a -1 to damage. Devin From pmj at comhem.se Tue Dec 28 13:13:57 2004 From: pmj at comhem.se (Peter Johansson) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 03:13:57 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Rules for trading Message-ID: <41D0C165.3090902@comhem.se> Hi! My campaign might go in the direction of a Trader PC taking the initiative to start a trading caravan. He will have access to quite a lot of money after some lucky adventuring in the past, making it possible to by goods in bulk. Has anyone come up with a manageble system for buying and selling stuff that takes in to account both the traders Trading skills and market factors like supply and demand within the RQ system? The only trading system I'm faintly familiar with in a RPG is in Traveller, but I don't have the rules for that system and have only used it as a player, not actually seeing the game mechanics behind it. Cheers, /Peter J From pmj at comhem.se Tue Dec 28 13:16:56 2004 From: pmj at comhem.se (Peter Johansson) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 03:16:56 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] On the Damage of Bows In-Reply-To: <1a6.2e1c32b2.2f021a9a@aol.com> References: <1a6.2e1c32b2.2f021a9a@aol.com> Message-ID: <41D0C217.2030008@comhem.se> Hmmm, my idea was that a Str 13 person cannot pull the Str 16 bow at all in any meaningful way. /Peter DevinC at aol.com wrote: >I wonder. Can a Str 13 person still pull a Str 16 bow enough to get some Str >bonus? > >In 3rd edition D&D it works like this: > >A given bow is constructed with a certain Str bonus. You can apply your Str >bonus up to the constructed bonus. You always apply a Str penalty. > >So, let's say Mr. A has a +2 Str bonus and picks up a +1 Str bow. He can >fire it with a +1 to damage. > >If Mr. A picks up a +3 Str bow, he can fire it for a +2 bonus to damage. > >If Mr. B has a Str penalty of -1, he can still pick up A +0 Str bow, a +1 >Str bow, or even a +3 Str bow, but he fires all of them with a -1 to damage. > >Devin >_______________________________________________ >RQ-Rules mailing list >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com >http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules >http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > > > From DevinC at aol.com Tue Dec 28 13:34:57 2004 From: DevinC at aol.com (DevinC at aol.com) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 21:34:57 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] On the Damage of Bows Message-ID: In a message dated 12/27/2004 6:17:33 PM Pacific Standard Time, pmj at comhem.se writes: <> Right. I just wonder if that is accurate. I have no idea, not being an expert on bows. I could see, from a purely logical point of view, how it could go both ways. I am sure some experts in archery will pipe in shortly :-) Devin From DevinC at aol.com Tue Dec 28 13:37:53 2004 From: DevinC at aol.com (DevinC at aol.com) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 21:37:53 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] Rules for trading Message-ID: I did a system for D&D. You could almost certainly adapt it for D&D. _http://www.devinweb.com/trading.htm_ (http://www.devinweb.com/trading.htm) It is not the end-all be-all of trading systems. But it might be a useful start for you. Devin From pmj at comhem.se Tue Dec 28 13:43:48 2004 From: pmj at comhem.se (Peter Johansson) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 03:43:48 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] On the Damage of Bows In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41D0C864.3070400@comhem.se> The D&D3 reference you made showed that the creators of that system don't think the way I did anyway. While wating for the achery experts to set things right, I'm looking forward to your comments on my trading question instead. :-) /Peter DevinC at aol.com wrote: >In a message dated 12/27/2004 6:17:33 PM Pacific Standard Time, >pmj at comhem.se writes: > ><in any meaningful way. > >/Peter>> > >Right. I just wonder if that is accurate. I have no idea, not being an >expert on bows. I could see, from a purely logical point of view, how it could go >both ways. > >I am sure some experts in archery will pipe in shortly :-) > >Devin > > > >_______________________________________________ >RQ-Rules mailing list >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com >http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules >http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > > > From rico at ricosweb.com Tue Dec 28 13:52:17 2004 From: rico at ricosweb.com (Rich Allen) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 19:52:17 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] On the Damage of Bows In-Reply-To: <41D0C217.2030008@comhem.se> Message-ID: <20041227195217.805531@lanpc> On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 03:16:56 +0100, Peter Johansson wrote: >?Hmmm, my idea was that a Str 13 person cannot pull the Str 16 bow at all >?in any meaningful way. Depends on the type of bow available in your campaign world. A recurve or longbow gets harder to pull the further back you pull it, so a bow built for STR 16 could be pulled about 3/4 back by a STR 13 character (just a guess, mind you). A compound bow is hardest to pull right at the start, so a STR 16 compound bow couldn't be used by a character with less that a STR 16. Neither types would give you any extra pull if your STR was higher than the bow's rating, but your fatigue would lessen. Something that takes relative STR into fatigue calculations would make this more realistic in my opinion. I haven't pulled a bow in a few years, but I still remember how tired (and sore) I was the first time I shot in a tournament after increasing the pull on my compound bow. :) Another thought I can't help throw into the mix: Tournament shooting is *much* different than deadly combat. In a tournament, the idea is level flight and accuracy. Each shots takes a long time and requires a calm mind. In a battle, quicker is better, accuracy is less important (as long as it hits *something*), a calm mind is nowhere to be found and often a rain of arrows in a long arch is the desired effect. I don't know how this should translate to RPG rules, but there it is. Rich Allen From pmj at comhem.se Tue Dec 28 14:00:10 2004 From: pmj at comhem.se (Peter Johansson) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 04:00:10 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Rules for trading In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41D0CC3A.1090500@comhem.se> Thanks Devin! This is exactly the kind of system I was looking for. I believe it is solid foundation for a RQ-like trading system. However, since I don't know D&D3, I wonder if there is a typo in the following example or if I miss a modification due to my unfamiliarity with the system: "Joe wants to purchase an uncommon good. His DC roll is a 10 and he adds his +13 for a total of 29. He subtracts 5 for uncommon scarcity netting him a 24." How come the sum of the roll of 10 and the added 13 equals 29? /Peter DevinC at aol.com wrote: >I did a system for D&D. You could almost certainly adapt it for D&D. > >_http://www.devinweb.com/trading.htm_ (http://www.devinweb.com/trading.htm) > >It is not the end-all be-all of trading systems. But it might be a useful >start for you. > >Devin >_______________________________________________ >RQ-Rules mailing list >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com >http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules >http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > > > From DevinC at aol.com Tue Dec 28 14:06:19 2004 From: DevinC at aol.com (DevinC at aol.com) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 22:06:19 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] Rules for trading Message-ID: <77.3babf6c0.2f0227ab@aol.com> In a message dated 12/27/2004 7:00:43 PM Pacific Standard Time, pmj at comhem.se writes: <> Thanks for catching the error. I will change the roll to a 16 and the rest of the math should stay the same. Devin From pmj at comhem.se Tue Dec 28 14:19:06 2004 From: pmj at comhem.se (Peter Johansson) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 04:19:06 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] On the Damage of Bows In-Reply-To: <20041227195217.805531@lanpc> References: <20041227195217.805531@lanpc> Message-ID: <41D0D0AA.3080202@comhem.se> Hi Rich! Rich Allen wrote: >On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 03:16:56 +0100, Peter Johansson wrote: > > >> Hmmm, my idea was that a Str 13 person cannot pull the Str 16 bow at all >> in any meaningful way. >> >> >Depends on the type of bow available in your campaign world. A recurve or longbow gets harder to pull the further back you pull it, so a bow built for STR 16 could be pulled about 3/4 back by a STR 13 character (just a guess, mind you). A compound bow is hardest to pull right at the start, so a STR 16 compound bow couldn't be used by a character with less that a STR 16. > Since I'm a hardcore RQ2 GM (alright an RQ2.5 then), playing in old time Glornatha (i.e. the Glorantaha of the early - mid 80:s) I have ruled out Longbows and only use Comp bows, making your comment above perfect for me. :-) >Neither types would give you any extra pull if your STR was higher than the bow's rating, but your fatigue would lessen. Something that takes relative STR into fatigue calculations would make this more realistic in my opinion. > That is a very good idea. However, it won't do much for my campaign since we don't use fatigue, others might find it very useful though. Thanks! /Peter From pmj at comhem.se Tue Dec 28 14:48:56 2004 From: pmj at comhem.se (Peter Johansson) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 04:48:56 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] On the Damage of Bows In-Reply-To: <20041227195217.805531@lanpc> References: <20041227195217.805531@lanpc> Message-ID: <41D0D7A8.5090607@comhem.se> Rich Allen wrote: >Another thought I can't help throw into the mix: Tournament shooting is *much* different than deadly combat. In a tournament, the idea is level flight and accuracy. Each shots takes a long time and requires a calm mind. In a battle, quicker is better, accuracy is less important (as long as it hits *something*), a calm mind is nowhere to be found and often a rain of arrows in a long arch is the desired effect. I don't know how this should translate to RPG rules, but there it is. > I once wrote a scenario with an archery tournament, using targets inspired by Disney's Robin Hood. If I remember correctly they had 3 rings being White (outer), Blue (middle) and Red (center). If a person scored a normal hit, it meant hitting the White ring, an Impale the Blue ring and a critical the Red ring. A miss of course was a miss, and to spice it up, a fumble could end up in the audience. :-) The different rings also equalled different scores (which I don't remember at the moment) and the two archers that scored best in every group of eight archers qualified for the next stage and so on. Unfortunately, almost all the PC:s died before the archery contest in a terribly stupid uphill attack against a group of arsonists that had terrorised the Apple Lane area. The stupidity was that they needed to roll their climb skill twice to get to the top of a steep hill (which they didn't have to climb in the first place) and the better climbers didn't wait for the slower, putting them in an outnumbered position when they reached the top. And to make things worse, a fumble orgy started with the "highlight" being the Humakti leader of the group ripping a piece of his armour to one side while shouting Humakt, letting himself be critically impaled in the chest. Ah well, the archery tournament is still in the drawer waiting to get used when the next PC group comes to Pavis, but enough of old memories. Rich, I'm not sure that tournament shooting really need special treatment since it will be the same for all archers. Everyone has the time to aim and try to reach the calm mind necessary for a perfect shot. I'd say that that is what the skill is all about in a situation like that. In a large battle, the same skill is to get your shot away on time or in the general direction. I realise that the differences between the two situations are immense, but does it affect the use of the same skill in your view? /Peter From tcantine at incentre.net Tue Dec 28 15:14:50 2004 From: tcantine at incentre.net (Tom Cantine) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 21:14:50 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] On bows In-Reply-To: <20041228024431.C4DD222271B@boomstick.screwheads.net> References: <20041228024431.C4DD222271B@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: <04A0805C-5887-11D9-B65D-000D9334A9EA@incentre.net> My experience with bows is limited, but it seems to me that the basic system as it stands in RQ3 is a pretty fair reflection of things. Each bow has a "minimum" STR and DEX to use, with a -5% penalty for every point the user falls short of these values. Drawing a bow is not a matter of pulling with all your strength, after all, but pulling easily enough to be able to control. Any reasonably normal human adventurer (STR enough to walk around) should be able to draw a composite bow enough to shoot an arrow from it with enough force to do 1D8+1 damage, but someone with a STR of 3 will be struggling and very unsteady, with an appropriate -50% penalty to hit. The arrow will probably go nowhere near the target, but it will go somewhere. A -50% penalty adds about 3% to your fumble chance, which I think is probably not enough under the circumstances. I'd be tempted to add to the basic rule for minimum STR and DEX for weapons that the fumble chance is increased by a full 1% for every point you fall short of the requirements. So, suppose Zippy the Archer, with a skill of 100%, gets zapped with spells reducing STR and DEX both to 3, but he tries to use his composite bow anyway. He's at a -80% to his skill (-50% for his STR lower than 13, -30% for DEX lower than 9). With a 20% chance, he'll fumble on 97-00, but with my proposed rule, since he's 16 points below minimum STR and DEX, he'll fumble on a 81-00. I think adventurers with insufficient STR and DEX should really avoid using weapons they're not able to handle comfortably. Even if they ARE highly skilled with the base weapon type, it can and should be dangerous. As for bow damage, I don't know if it should reflect damage bonuses much at all, although I do sort of like the mechanism for the atlatl. Arrows themselves should have a damage rating, maybe 1D4+1 depending on the sort of head mounted, and then the bow propelling it supplies the damage bonus... From rico at ricosweb.com Tue Dec 28 15:29:38 2004 From: rico at ricosweb.com (Rich Allen) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 21:29:38 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] On the Damage of Bows In-Reply-To: <41D0D0AA.3080202@comhem.se> Message-ID: <20041227212938.551347@lanpc> On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 04:19:06 +0100, Peter Johansson wrote: >?Since I'm a hardcore RQ2 GM (alright an RQ2.5 then), playing in old time >?Glornatha (i.e. the Glorantaha of the early - mid 80:s) I have ruled out >?Longbows and only use Comp bows, making your comment above perfect for >?me. :-) Are you sure compound bows are right for a bronze age game? I honestly don't know any kind of history with the bow, but I can't imagine pulleys and composite limbs in the Roman army. :) Recurve would be state of the art for Glorantha, I would think. I'm pretty sure the Huns use a short recurve. Rich From DevinC at aol.com Tue Dec 28 15:46:47 2004 From: DevinC at aol.com (DevinC at aol.com) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 23:46:47 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] On the Damage of Bows Message-ID: <12d.529b5d23.2f023f37@aol.com> In a message dated 12/27/2004 8:30:19 PM Pacific Standard Time, rico at ricosweb.com writes: <> No, by Comp. bow he meant Composite Bow not Compound Bow. Composite bows were made of wood and bone and were stronger than yew longbows. I refer you to: _http://www.primitiveways.com/pt-composite_bow.html_ (http://www.primitiveways.com/pt-composite_bow.html) Devin From rico at ricosweb.com Tue Dec 28 15:49:27 2004 From: rico at ricosweb.com (Rich Allen) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 21:49:27 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] On the Damage of Bows In-Reply-To: <41D0D7A8.5090607@comhem.se> Message-ID: <20041227214927.699640@lanpc> On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 04:48:56 +0100, Peter Johansson wrote: >?I once wrote a scenario with an archery tournament, using targets >?inspired by Disney's Robin Hood. If I remember correctly they had 3 >?rings being White (outer), Blue (middle) and Red (center). If a person >?scored a normal hit, it meant hitting the White ring, an Impale the Blue >?ring and a critical the Red ring. A miss of course was a miss, and to >?spice it up, a fumble could end up in the audience. :-) The different >?rings also equalled different scores (which I don't remember at the >?moment) and the two archers that scored best in every group of eight >?archers qualified for the next stage and so on. In the tournaments I participated in, the targets had ten circles: the middle was worth ten points, next one out worth nine, etc. The middle circle (bullseye) was about 2 inches in diameter and anything in the 8 or lower was pretty much considered a miss. Ten rounds of three arrows gives a 300 point possible and the top three scorers were always at or above 290 points. So to your question... I can't picture in my head how the special and critical system would apply to tournament archery. I suppose if your archery skill was around 50 then specials would help you, but I don't think someone with a 50 skill in archery has any business in a tournament in the first place. (I hope that doesn't sound arrogant!) Remember that the target is the bullseye, not the entire ten circle area. A "fumble" would be anything outside the five point circle. Nobody should be missing the target completely. Remember the technology difference between a modern archery rig and the bows available in a bronze age society. Impeccably straight carbon shafts with precisely positioned, identical fletchings is a lot better in terms of accuracy over an ash wood shaft with chicken feathers held on by thread. Same for the bow, with 20-ply laminated limbs and high-strength bow strings over solid yew and cat gut... Well, you get the point. Here's a good picture of a modern compound bow: http://www.martinarchery.com/manual/2004manual/parts.html I do think that the same skill can apply to both tournament archery and ranged combat, but the skill level may mean something different in each situation. In a tournament, a skill of 90 means you are scoring 280 or better. In combat, a skill of 90 means you are able to send arrows into a crowd or enemies and expect to do damage with each one. Rich From rico at ricosweb.com Tue Dec 28 15:57:58 2004 From: rico at ricosweb.com (Rich Allen) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 21:57:58 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] On the Damage of Bows In-Reply-To: <12d.529b5d23.2f023f37@aol.com> Message-ID: <20041227215758.226013@lanpc> On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 23:46:47 EST, DevinC at aol.com wrote: >?No, by Comp. bow he meant Composite Bow not Compound Bow. Composite bows >?were made of wood and bone and were stronger than yew longbows. > >?I refer you to: > >?http://www.primitiveways.com/pt-composite_bow.html > >?Devin OK, that's a recurve bow; the construction methods don't really change the fact that the further you pull it back, the stronger you need to be to do so. Maybe I misunderstood what part he was agreeing to in my original post. :) Rich From Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za Tue Dec 28 18:47:32 2004 From: Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za (Den, Tony T) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 09:47:32 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Halflings Message-ID: Never played one, don't know if I ever want to. On my groups world, we are considering doing away with Halflings and the traditional dwarves in favour of a more devious kind of "dwarf" based on Ukko from the 2000AD Sl?ine stories. Gianni wrote: > Hi gang > > Anybody ever tried using halflings in a Gloranthan RQ adventure? Not Gloranthan, no. But we used them in my Greyhawk campaign. __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Standard Bank Disclaimer and Confidentiality Note This e-mail, its attachments and any rights attaching hereto are, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, the property of Standard Bank Group Limited and/or its subsidiaries ("the Group"). It is confidential, private and intended for the addressee only. Should you not be the addressee and receive this e-mail by mistake, kindly notify the sender, and delete this e-mail, immediately and do not disclose or use same in any manner whatsoever. Views and opinions expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender unless clearly stated as those of the Group. The Group accepts no liability whatsoever for any loss or damages whatsoever and howsoever incurred, or suffered, resulting, or arising, from the use of this email or its attachments. The Group does not warrant the integrity of this e-mail nor that it is free of errors, viruses, interception or interference. Licensed divisions of the Standard Bank Group are authorised financial services providers in terms of the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act, No 37 of 2002 (FAIS). For information about the Standard Bank Group Limited visit our website http://www.standardbank.co.za ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za Tue Dec 28 18:48:49 2004 From: Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za (Den, Tony T) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 09:48:49 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Halflings Message-ID: Are voyeuristic ducks on glorantha known as Peking duck? -----Original Message----- David Smart Just think of them as non-swimming, wingless ducks. __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Standard Bank Disclaimer and Confidentiality Note This e-mail, its attachments and any rights attaching hereto are, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, the property of Standard Bank Group Limited and/or its subsidiaries ("the Group"). It is confidential, private and intended for the addressee only. Should you not be the addressee and receive this e-mail by mistake, kindly notify the sender, and delete this e-mail, immediately and do not disclose or use same in any manner whatsoever. Views and opinions expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender unless clearly stated as those of the Group. The Group accepts no liability whatsoever for any loss or damages whatsoever and howsoever incurred, or suffered, resulting, or arising, from the use of this email or its attachments. The Group does not warrant the integrity of this e-mail nor that it is free of errors, viruses, interception or interference. Licensed divisions of the Standard Bank Group are authorised financial services providers in terms of the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act, No 37 of 2002 (FAIS). For information about the Standard Bank Group Limited visit our website http://www.standardbank.co.za ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From gianni at basicrps.com Tue Dec 28 19:03:17 2004 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 09:03:17 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Halflings In-Reply-To: <20041227220057.88240.qmail@web41110.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041227220057.88240.qmail@web41110.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1104220997.41d113459c252@imp.webhuset.no> Hi all > > *removing a cool Halfling-integration myth* > > > The hill Hobbits live in holes. The marsh Hobbits > > live in houses built on > > > stilts. They are still Orlanthi but resent their > > having been cursed by an > > > Orlanthi king. As a consequence, some of them have > > turned to the > > > Provincial Church of the Seven Mothers. > > Based on this background, I would say they should have > turned away from worship of Orlanth to spirit > worshipping. Well, the prophecy will somehow say that the hero lifting the curse shall be an Orlanthi hero, so the Hobbits must stick to the old faith. And I like my player characters to be torn between group loyalty and personal interest. > > on a more nuts-and-bolts level, i should warn you > > that playing a halfling > > under the RQ3 rules (where SIZ accounts for half > > your hit points) can be a > > little deadly. I use RQ2. G. From gianni at basicrps.com Tue Dec 28 19:05:16 2004 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 09:05:16 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Rules for trading In-Reply-To: <41D0C165.3090902@comhem.se> References: <41D0C165.3090902@comhem.se> Message-ID: <1104221116.41d113bca37b7@imp.webhuset.no> The RQ2 write-up of the cult of Issaries had trading rules. You may want to check Rick's Cult Compendium. G. From gianni at basicrps.com Tue Dec 28 19:10:09 2004 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 09:10:09 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] On the Damage of Bows In-Reply-To: <20041227212938.551347@lanpc> References: <20041227212938.551347@lanpc> Message-ID: <1104221409.41d114e1a37b9@imp.webhuset.no> Anybody interested in composite bows should have a look at the movie 'Musa, the Warrior' (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0275083/) and at the Osprey booklet 'Mounted Archers of the Steppe 600 BC?AD 1300' (http://tinyurl.com/4a7ft) You will find nice examples of Bronze Age composite bows in the latter. To get back to the rules query, I would say that a charcater lacking the necessary strength cannot use a composite bow designed for a superior strength. Also, as someone suggested, standard 'high street' bows should target average strength, whereas bows for higher strength must be made specifically for the archer. This is well explained in the Osprey booklet. Bows, but also arrows, were made for a particular person's strength and eye-to-hand distance. In RQ terms, I guess this would involve SIZ as well as STR. Gianni From patrice.bousquet at gso.fr Tue Dec 28 20:30:28 2004 From: patrice.bousquet at gso.fr (Patrice BOUSQUET) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 10:30:28 +0100 Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=E9f=2E_=3A_Re=3A_[RQ-Rules]_On_the_Damage_of_Bows?= Message-ID: Rich wrote: >I do think that the same skill can apply to both tournament archery and ranged combat, but the >skill level may mean something different in each situation. In a tournament, a skill of 90 means >you are scoring 280 or better. In combat, a skill of 90 means you are able to send arrows into a >crowd or enemies and expect to do damage with each one. Remember skills are an evaluation of efficience in stressfull situations. In a calm situation, where PC have time to concentrate, the skill may be improved by a constant or a multiplier (?). Patrice From pmj at comhem.se Wed Dec 29 01:42:44 2004 From: pmj at comhem.se (Peter Johansson) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 15:42:44 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] On the Damage of Bows In-Reply-To: <20041227215758.226013@lanpc> References: <20041227215758.226013@lanpc> Message-ID: <41D170E4.8060303@comhem.se> Back after a good ten hour sleep. :-) Hmmm, I think I was agreeing to that according to http://members.aol.com/dargolyt/TheForge/compbow.htm a Composite bow is also called a compound bow in more recent times. Maybe I'm, or rather the guy referred to above, is wrong. However, I wasn't agreeing to modern bows seen used in archery contests being used in a bronze age world. :-) Sorry for any misunderstanding. /Peter Rich Allen wrote: >On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 23:46:47 EST, DevinC at aol.com wrote: > > >> No, by Comp. bow he meant Composite Bow not Compound Bow. Composite bows >> were made of wood and bone and were stronger than yew longbows. >> >> I refer you to: >> >> http://www.primitiveways.com/pt-composite_bow.html >> >> Devin >> >> > >OK, that's a recurve bow; the construction methods don't really change the fact that the further you pull it back, the stronger you need to be to do so. Maybe I misunderstood what part he was agreeing to in my original post. :) > >Rich > > >_______________________________________________ >RQ-Rules mailing list >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com >http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules >http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > > > From rico at ricosweb.com Wed Dec 29 01:52:48 2004 From: rico at ricosweb.com (Rich Allen) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 07:52:48 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] On the Damage of Bows In-Reply-To: <41D170E4.8060303@comhem.se> Message-ID: <2004122875248.328544@laptop> On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 15:42:44 +0100, Peter Johansson wrote: >?Back after a good ten hour sleep. :-) > >?Hmmm, I think I was agreeing to that according to > >?http://members.aol.com/dargolyt/TheForge/compbow.htm > >?a Composite bow is also called a compound bow in more recent times. Ack! Well, to me a compound bow has pulleys and multiple cables. The full force of the draw occurs at the beginning, so for example a 70 pound compound bow would only be about 30 pounds when fully drawn. This has nothing to do with ancient archery however, so I'm going to pretend I never had this conversation! :) I really should look into some accurate archery history. Rich From pmj at comhem.se Wed Dec 29 01:59:36 2004 From: pmj at comhem.se (Peter Johansson) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 15:59:36 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Rules for trading In-Reply-To: <1104221116.41d113bca37b7@imp.webhuset.no> References: <41D0C165.3090902@comhem.se> <1104221116.41d113bca37b7@imp.webhuset.no> Message-ID: <41D174D8.3010207@comhem.se> Hi Gianni! Yes, the Bargaining rules. Doesn't work well I'm afraid for the kind of bulk trade I'm interested in. The plan was to avoid rolling the bargain skill maybe twenty times to get rid of all or parts of a cargo. The players not being traders would have a fit if we played out all the trading. :-) I was really impressed by Devin's rules and recommend all interested in reading them. /Peter Gianni wrote: >The RQ2 write-up of the cult of Issaries had trading rules. You may want to >check Rick's Cult Compendium. > >G. >_______________________________________________ >RQ-Rules mailing list >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com >http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules >http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > > > From jurrubin at earthlink.net Wed Dec 29 04:18:16 2004 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 11:18:16 -0600 (GMT-06:00) Subject: [RQ-Rules] On the Damage of Bows Message-ID: <8508544.1104254296811.JavaMail.root@grover.psp.pas.earthlink.net> There are a number of excellent websites on the use of the ancient composite bow. Here's an overview of the Mongolian composite bow. http://www.coldsiberia.org/monbow.htm The following website belongs to a Hungarian who handmakes and sells recurve compound bows using either/both historically accurate and modern materials; some of them are downright gorgeous! http://www.grozerarchery.com/index_m.htm As an adjunct to the above, here's a link on horse archery using such composite bows. The second button actually downloads a massive .mpg file showing a horse archer (Mongol-style) competition that's just amazing. http://www.horsearchery.org/links.html And here's a link for the website of whom some consider to be the world's foremost expert on horse archery and one of the competitors in the video file above. http://www.horsebackarchery.com David Smart From DevinC at aol.com Wed Dec 29 05:24:03 2004 From: DevinC at aol.com (DevinC at aol.com) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 13:24:03 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] Rules for trading Message-ID: I corrected some math in the final example of Joe the Trader. If anyone notes any other mathematical errors, let me know. Devin From dahak at dahak.free-online.co.uk Wed Dec 29 09:21:13 2004 From: dahak at dahak.free-online.co.uk (Adam Canning) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 22:21:13 -0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 12, Issue 13 In-Reply-To: <20041228024432.7491F222722@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: <41D1DC59.23473.5B5417@localhost> On 27 Dec 2004 at 18:44, rq-rules-request at crashbox.com wrote: > Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 03:16:56 +0100 > From: Peter Johansson > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] On the Damage of Bows > To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." > Message-ID: <41D0C217.2030008 at comhem.se> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Hmmm, my idea was that a Str 13 person cannot pull the Str 16 bow at all > in any meaningful way. > > /Peter > > > DevinC at aol.com wrote: > > >I wonder. Can a Str 13 person still pull a Str 16 bow enough to get some Str > >bonus? [RQ3 anwser] A character is at a penalty of -5% to hit for each point below the weapons characteristic minimums.] So -15% to hit. and the usual Half Damage bonus. Of course I don't remember a BRP bow with a Str 16 limit. [Dragon Newt Bone Bows and Recurve Long bows are both STR 17 all the others are 9, 11 or 13, not counting the +2 for skinsplitter arrows.] -- Adam "I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully." George W Bush From jurrubin at earthlink.net Wed Dec 29 12:16:34 2004 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (D. Smart) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 19:16:34 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] On the Damage of Bows In-Reply-To: <41D1DC59.23473.5B5417@localhost> References: <41D1DC59.23473.5B5417@localhost> Message-ID: <41D20572.4070406@earthlink.net> Huh?!? I don't recall seeing these two types of bows or the arrow in any RQ3 material. Can you tell me where I can find details on these? David Adam Canning wrote: >Of course I don't remember a BRP bow with a Str 16 limit. [Dragon >Newt Bone Bows and Recurve Long bows are both STR 17 all the >others are 9, 11 or 13, not counting the +2 for skinsplitter arrows.] > > > From alan.richards75 at ntlworld.com Thu Dec 30 08:46:29 2004 From: alan.richards75 at ntlworld.com (alan richards) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 21:46:29 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Bows In-Reply-To: <20041229011700.B5D92222733@boomstick.screwheads.net> References: <20041229011700.B5D92222733@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: <18E21464-59E3-11D9-A5BF-000D933E706C@ntlworld.com> Dear all In my experience RPGers have fallen into three categories re: Longbows 1. Who gives a shit 2. Longbows are great, honestly why did anyone ever bother with gunpowder? Hey never mind gunpowder Longbows will beat Blasters 3. Longbows are over powered in RPGs, now * that's where the real firepower is at * insert one only In my opinion (and hence IMG) SIZ of 3d for humans is silly (I have bad memories of some Stormbringer III characters) but SIZ of 2d+6 gives everyone a damage bonus. This is also silly. So I roll SIZ for humans as 2d+3 (This is important for this discussion bear (bare? I can never remember) with me) As an aside I also roll INT as 2d+3 for humans Bows in generally are underpowered in RQ Bow damage is 1d8 (or 1d8+1 if you use 'dice adds') Each Bow is made to a STR+SIZ (21 for the average off the bowyer's shelf model). However in the game they are listed as 'X lb' bows not 'X STR+SIZ' bows. As an entirely inaccurate rule of thumb with no scientific basis whatsoever I multiply the STR+SIZ by 2 to give 'poundage' or 'draw weight' The damage bonus is based on this STR+SIZ A character who is deficient in combined STR+SIZ reduces their effective skill by 5% per missing point A character with higher STR+SIZ does not get a better damage bonus than the bow provides A character with very high STR+SIZ (rule of thumb twice the bow's but it all depends on maximum game fun) breaks the bow Hunting Bows, Self Bows, etc. made of crappy wood add half normal db Composite Assyrian recurve Bows, Welsh Longbows made from a single piece of Yew incorporating Heartwood and Numenorean Steel Bows or Melnibonean Bone Bows add full db Crossbows do 2d base (or 2d+2) Again built to a specific STR+SIZ ('poundage' or 'draw weight') Hand cocked models add/subtract +1 per die of damage bonus and shoot 1/1 Models cocked with a goat's foot add half normal damage bonus and shoot 1/3 Models cocked with a proper windlass add full damage bonus and shoot 1/5 Alan Ancilliary trivia (of no interest to many) The terminology 'Longbow' and 'Shortbow' are open to debate. Some say Longbow was used to distinguishing from the short Crossbow (possibly by the church when banning the use of Crossbows against Christians) Some say that the Medievel English/Welsh used a 'War Bow' Some (including me if I'm drunk enough) say that The Alans invented the use of the Composite Bow from horseback, were the first army to have promoted leaders on the basis of competence rather than accident of birth and ruled the longest contiguous land empire of ancient world. Others (including Pliny the elder) disagree. From aescleal at btinternet.com Thu Dec 30 21:21:22 2004 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (ASHLEY MUNDAY) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 10:21:22 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Bows In-Reply-To: <18E21464-59E3-11D9-A5BF-000D933E706C@ntlworld.com> Message-ID: <20041230102122.28167.qmail@web86201.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Alan R. he say: "...but SIZ of 2d+6 gives everyone a damage bonus." Tell that to my STR 13 SIZ 10 adventurer. Cheers, Ash --- alan richards wrote: > Dear all > > In my experience RPGers have fallen into three > categories re: Longbows > > 1. Who gives a shit > 2. Longbows are great, honestly why did anyone ever > bother with > gunpowder? Hey never mind gunpowder Longbows will > beat Blasters > 3. Longbows are over powered in RPGs, now Bows, Crossbows, > Blowpipes, Darts, Gravid Hippoes>* that's where the > real firepower is > at > > * insert one only > > > In my opinion (and hence IMG) > > SIZ of 3d for humans is silly (I have bad memories > of some Stormbringer > III characters) but SIZ of 2d+6 gives everyone a > damage bonus. This is > also silly. > So I roll SIZ for humans as 2d+3 > (This is important for this discussion bear (bare? I > can never > remember) with me) > As an aside I also roll INT as 2d+3 for humans > > Bows in generally are underpowered in RQ > Bow damage is 1d8 (or 1d8+1 if you use 'dice adds') > Each Bow is made to a STR+SIZ (21 for the average > off the bowyer's > shelf model). However in the game they are listed as > 'X lb' bows not 'X > STR+SIZ' bows. As an entirely inaccurate rule of > thumb with no > scientific basis whatsoever I multiply the STR+SIZ > by 2 to give > 'poundage' or 'draw weight' > The damage bonus is based on this STR+SIZ > A character who is deficient in combined STR+SIZ > reduces their > effective skill by 5% per missing point > A character with higher STR+SIZ does not get a > better damage bonus than > the bow provides > A character with very high STR+SIZ (rule of thumb > twice the bow's but > it all depends on maximum game fun) breaks the bow > > Hunting Bows, Self Bows, etc. made of crappy wood > add half normal db > Composite Assyrian recurve Bows, Welsh Longbows made > from a single > piece of Yew incorporating Heartwood and Numenorean > Steel Bows or > Melnibonean Bone Bows add full db > > Crossbows do 2d base (or 2d+2) > Again built to a specific STR+SIZ ('poundage' or > 'draw weight') > Hand cocked models add/subtract +1 per die of damage > bonus and shoot 1/1 > Models cocked with a goat's foot add half normal > damage bonus and > shoot 1/3 > Models cocked with a proper windlass add full damage > bonus and shoot 1/5 > > > > Alan > > > Ancilliary trivia (of no interest to many) > > The terminology 'Longbow' and 'Shortbow' are open to > debate. > Some say Longbow was used to distinguishing from the > short Crossbow > (possibly by the church when banning the use of > Crossbows against > Christians) > Some say that the Medievel English/Welsh used a 'War > Bow' > > Some (including me if I'm drunk enough) say that The > Alans invented the > use of the Composite Bow from horseback, were the > first army to have > promoted leaders on the basis of competence rather > than accident of > birth and ruled the longest contiguous land empire > of ancient world. > Others (including Pliny the elder) disagree. > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > From peter at maranci.net Fri Dec 31 02:31:24 2004 From: peter at maranci.net (peter at maranci.net) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 10:31:24 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ Wiki attacked by spam Message-ID: <143400-2200412430153124163@M2W066.mail2web.com> The RuneQuest Wiki ( http://www.runequest.org/index.php?RuneQuest ) is being hit more and more often by spammers. They have been coming in and adding hundreds of "Sponsored Links" to random pages. In some cases they have also thoughtfully deleted actual RuneQuest material, presumably to make space for their crap - actually, it's just out of malice. I have been manually going in and cleaning up their messes, but it's now become an every-day chore. At the rate things are going, I will soon be snowed under. Rather than give in to the spammers, I will delete the wiki completely. I have NOT decided to do that yet, and I will let everyone know if it comes to that - but things have been getting awfully bad awfully quickly. Anyway, if anyone wants to save some or all of the content of the wiki, it would probably be a good idea to do that soon. ->Peter -- Peter Maranci peter at maranci.net Pete's RuneQuest & Roleplaying! http://www.runequest.org/rq.htm -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From tim at domibia.com Fri Dec 31 02:50:05 2004 From: tim at domibia.com (Tim Huntley) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 07:50:05 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ Wiki attacked by spam In-Reply-To: <143400-2200412430153124163@M2W066.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <20041230155012.8EAFA2226ED@boomstick.screwheads.net> > Rather than give in to the spammers, I will delete the wiki completely. Why don't you upgrade it to a wiki that requires registration and/or authentication? That will cut down on *some* of it - granted, asshat spammers could still register and then spam it, but many don't want to go through all that trouble. Tim. -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.296 / Virus Database: 265.6.6 - Release Date: 12/28/2004 From mattley at gmail.com Fri Dec 31 03:33:14 2004 From: mattley at gmail.com (Matt Conrad) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 08:33:14 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ Wiki attacked by spam In-Reply-To: <20041230155012.8EAFA2226ED@boomstick.screwheads.net> References: <143400-2200412430153124163@M2W066.mail2web.com> <20041230155012.8EAFA2226ED@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: Yes, or just make it read only--even if it was permanent, that would be better than taking it offline, and quite possibly these guys will go away in time. Matt On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 07:50:05 -0800, Tim Huntley wrote: > > Rather than give in to the spammers, I will delete the wiki completely. > > Why don't you upgrade it to a wiki that requires registration and/or > authentication? That will cut down on *some* of it - granted, asshat > spammers could still register and then spam it, but many don't want to go > through all that trouble. > > Tim. > > -- > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > Version: 7.0.296 / Virus Database: 265.6.6 - Release Date: 12/28/2004 > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > From tim at domibia.com Fri Dec 31 03:35:03 2004 From: tim at domibia.com (Tim Huntley) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 08:35:03 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ Wiki attacked by spam In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041230163505.787762226F2@boomstick.screwheads.net> The newest version of PHP Wiki uses authentication - I'm in the middle of configuring it for an intranet wiki at my day job... Tim. -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.296 / Virus Database: 265.6.6 - Release Date: 12/28/2004 From soltakss at yahoo.com Fri Dec 31 14:26:27 2004 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (Simon Phipp) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 03:26:27 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: On the Damage of Bows In-Reply-To: <20041229011700.B5D92222733@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: <20041231032627.30211.qmail@web51005.mail.yahoo.com> Gianni gives some nice links about bows and horse archery and he mentions the Bronze Age, so we can't go wrong there: > http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0275083/ > http://tinyurl.com/4a7ft David Smart gives some more wonderful links: > http://www.coldsiberia.org/monbow.htm > http://www.grozerarchery.com/index_m.htm > http://www.horsearchery.org/links.html > http://www.horsebackarchery.com Good for background on Pentian or Mongol/Hunnic/Steppe Nomads. Good also for the Mythic Russia site and Alternate Earth site as well. Gianni: > To get back to the rules query, I would say that a charcater lacking the > necessary strength cannot use a composite bow designed for a superior > strength. > Also, as someone suggested, standard 'high street' bows should target > average > strength, whereas bows for higher strength must be made specifically for > the > archer. This is well explained in the Osprey booklet. Bows, but also > arrows, > were made for a particular person's strength and eye-to-hand distance. In > RQ > terms, I guess this would involve SIZ as well as STR. Personally, I think the RQ rules are a simplified abstraction of real life, so whereas experts in archery, swordsmanship, unarmed combat etc. are all very well, I want a nice simple set of rules that look fairly reasonable. So, using the standard rules for bows - self bows, composite bows, long bows - most people can use self bows, strong people can use composite bows/long bows. We also used the rule that a bow made specially for the person (5x cost and 5x time to make it) allows the user to add his/her missile damage bonus to the damage, so someone with a 2D6 damage bonus usng a specially made composite bow would do 1D8+1+2D3 damage, which is enough to make a considerable difference in the damage. Adam Canning: > [RQ3 anwser] A character is at a penalty of -5% to hit for each point > below the weapons characteristic minimums.] > > So -15% to hit. and the usual Half Damage bonus. Is that right? I didn't know that. We used to say if you didn't have the stats you couldn't use the weapon, as that is easier. David Smart: > Huh?!? > > I don't recall seeing these two types of bows or the arrow in any RQ3 > material. Can you tell me > where I can find details on these? The dragonewt bow was in the Wyrms Footnotes article on dragonewts, I think. Longbows were in RQ3, weren't they? I've never heard of skinsplitter arrows, but they sound pretty nasty. See Ya Simon ___________________________________________________________ ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com