From: owner-rq-rules-digest To: rq-rules-digest@hops.wharton.upenn.edu Subject: RQ Rules Digest: V2 #115 Reply-To: rq-rules Errors-To: owner-rq-rules-digest Precedence: bulk Content-Return: Prohibited Return-Path: owner-rq-rules-digest RQ Rules Digest: Thursday, 9 November 1995 Volume 02 : Number 115 TABLE OF CONTENTS David Dunham instant fatality Gawain Emrys Ap Geoffrey Fudging Frederic Moulin Fudging Frederic Moulin instant fatality Sandy Petersen Fudgin' and GMin' Gawain Emrys Ap Geoffrey Fudgin' and GMin' RE:TORG martin 102541.3423@compuserv Killer Scenarios Frederic Moulin Killer Scenarios Brian Tickler Fudging... RULES OF THE ROAD 1. Do not include large sections of a message in your reply. Especially not to add "Yeah, I agree" or "No, I disagree." Or be excoriated. If someone writes something good and you want to say "good show" please do. But don't include the whole message you praise. 2. Use an appropriate Subject line. 3. Learn the art of paraphrasing: Don't just quote and comment on a point-by-point basis. When paraphrasing you demonstrate exactly how well you understand the point someone was trying to make. 4. There is no number 4. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: dunham@hamachi.pensee.com (David Dunham) Date: Wed, 8 Nov 1995 21:40:37 -0800 Subject: Re: instant fatality Several people couldn't remember "instantly fatal" stuff in RQ. I'm not going to bother looking it up, because I think most people would consider a severed head location instantly fatal. David Dunham Pensee Corporation dunham@nw.pensee.com Voice/Fax 206 783 7404 http://www.pensee.com/dunham/ "I say we should listen to the customers and give them what they want." "What they want is better products for free." --Scott Adams ------------------------------ From: Gawain Emrys Ap Geoffrey Date: Thu, 9 Nov 1995 08:59:24 PST Subject: Re: Fudging On Wed, 8 Nov 95 17:57:25 -0600 Sandy Petersen wrote: > > To a slight extent, I fear I'm being taken for a "kind" GM, because > I give players subtle warnings of doom and sometimes fudge. Lest > anyone misunderstand, I _am_ the Sandy Petersen who wrote CALL OF > CTHULHU. (And DOOM.) > I play CoC Sandy, NO-ONE could ever accuse you of being kind!! Gawain Emrys Ap Geoffrey PS. Is there a CoC list anywhere? ------------------------------ From: Frederic Moulin Date: Thu, 09 Nov 1995 10:31:32 -0500 Subject: Re: Fudging > One of the reasons that I tend to keep characters from >dying pointlessly is so that when they _do_ die, it's for a reason. >In the scenario Fred describes, (I think it's the one based in >Fonrit from HEROES magazine, but maybe not. My memory fades.) the >PCs are shown no mercy. I enjoy unleashing the dogs of war upon my >players, and making them fight for their lives. Yes, it is the Fronrit scenario. To be honest with Sandy, the lack of mercy shown to the PCs at least make sens in the scenario. For those of you that have not played it, the story is that a Sorcerer, counselor of a local lord, wants to increase his influence by plotting a fake assassination, and apparently saving the lord's life. To carry out his plot, he looks for a bunch of dumb "canon-folder" without the real ability to kill his master (and destroy his plan) and destinated to be killed immediately after the attempt, in order to prevent them from revealing his dark scheme. Since he enjoy the complicity of the commander of the royal guard and have autority over the local law enforcement, any incapacitated or captured PC is to be killed on the spot, and instead of the reward, the surviving party is greeted at their hideout by a party of 8 or 10 real assassins, followed by goules, hell hounds... I think we lost 8 PCs in that single scenario, which is a testimony to Sandy's killer mind, and a serious wake-up call to the AD&D players. If I remember well, there is a little introduction from Sandy at the beginning about something like "if you have players that goes around killing and ransacking, this should give them a little lesson..." It sure did! Fred ------------------------------ From: Frederic Moulin Date: Thu, 09 Nov 1995 10:50:29 -0500 Subject: Re: instant fatality At 09:40 PM 11/8/95 -0800, you wrote: >Several people couldn't remember "instantly fatal" stuff in RQ. I'm not >going to bother looking it up, because I think most people would consider a >severed head location instantly fatal. In my understanding of the english language, the head is not considered a "limb" (unless maybe for some creatures of CoC). The 2xHP=severed rule applies specifically to limbs. I agree 100% that a severed head should be mortal, but I am not convinced that every blow that inflicts 2xHP actually severs the head. For once that we have a "not too mortal" rule specifically stated, I am not going to replace it by one that send players to an instant death, just for the fun of having to fudge the dice when it actually happens! Now this is IMHO, of course. Frederic ------------------------------ From: Sandy Petersen Date: Thu, 9 Nov 95 08:59:40 -0600 Subject: Re: Fudgin' and GMin' Fred >I have played in a few campaigns where I quickly realized that >whatever I would do, my PC would never die, and I am not in them >anymore, it just does not interest me. This is what turned me off TORG. A friend of mine, who'd helped design the game, ran a campaign for us, and it soon became clear that it was almost impossible to be killed. As soon as I realized this, my character began to behave with total disregard for his life. But of course didn't die. The GM was irked and made some effort to punish me for it, but he couldn't kill me without fudging the rules (that's a switch, eh?) so I survived. It was sad. ------------------------------ From: Gawain Emrys Ap Geoffrey Date: Thu, 9 Nov 1995 16:34:59 PST Subject: Re: Fudgin' and GMin' RE:TORG Hoi Chummers, This is worrying me... On Thu, 9 Nov 95 08:59:40 -0600 Sandy Petersen wrote: > The GM was irked and made some > effort to punish me for it, but he couldn't kill me >without fudging > the rules (that's a switch, eh?) so I survived. It was >sad. I think I must be dong something wrong: I've only run TORG about three times (individual sessions) but I've managed to have a few players in fear for their lives. Ooops! ************************************************************ * * * * GAWAIN EMRYS AP GEOFFREY * "It's a pink rabbit in space, * * * It can pretty much do what it * * OBO: Chablis Roleplaying * wants!" * * Production * - My Mother * * * * ************************************************************ ------------------------------ From: martin <102541.3423@compuserve.com> Date: 09 Nov 95 12:31:41 EST Subject: Killer Scenarios Frederic Moulin wrote this about Sandys scenario: >Yes, it is the Fronrit scenario. To be honest with Sandy, the lack of mercy >shown to the PCs at least make sens in the scenario. >For those of you that have not played it, the story is that a Sorcerer, >counselor of a local lord, wants to increase his influence by plotting a >fake assassination, and apparently saving the lord's life. To carry out his >plot, he looks for a bunch of dumb "canon-folder" without the real ability >to kill his master (and destroy his plan) and destinated to be killed >immediately after the attempt, in order to prevent them from revealing his >dark scheme. Since he enjoy the complicity of the commander of the royal >guard and have autority over the local law enforcement, any incapacitated or >captured PC is to be killed on the spot, and instead of the reward, the >surviving party is greeted at their hideout by a party of 8 or 10 real >assassins, followed by goules, hell hounds... >I think we lost 8 PCs in that single scenario, which is a testimony to >Sandy's killer mind, and a serious wake-up call to the AD&D players. If I >remember well, there is a little introduction from Sandy at the beginning >about something like "if you have players that goes around killing and >ransacking, this should give them a little lesson..." It sure did! Thats not a killer scenario, thats a suicide scenario! As far as I can see there is an enormous chance of you losing most of your PCs in one go. I really cannot see the point in killing characters at such a rate. If I did that in my campaign I might as well tear up all the work I'd done for the past year on NPC interaction because non of the newly rolled up PCs would know who any of the NPCs which make up the background were! Added to the GMs total loss of much roleplay possibility there comes the problem of 3 out of the eleven players (you indicated that three lived and eight PCs died) would have finished the game playing, the rest presumably went home of went to Pizza Hut because they had nothing to do. The alternative to that would be rolling up new characters there and then, which in RQ is no alternative at all. It takes half an hour usually to roll up a PC, plus over an hour to research his background and his lineage. I hate having PCs without a background, otherwise they are so faceless that they might as well not be there (unless played by a RQ Diva/Guru which is rare). In addition to this, if we play once a week, I'm not going to spend any time in game actualy doing anything but game, otherwise nothing will get done. All PC creation and experience etc should be done out of game if possible. So my questions are, what does the group, the majority of which are sitting on their thumbs for the whole time do? What does the GM do about his background? What is done about the huge amount of GM work (new PCs, NPC backgounds etc) when the GM invariably works six days a week and has little time for unceasing labour? Martin Laurie ------------------------------ From: Frederic Moulin Date: Thu, 09 Nov 1995 15:05:39 -0500 Subject: Re: Killer Scenarios >Thats not a killer scenario, thats a suicide scenario! As far as I can see >there is an enormous chance of you losing most of your PCs in one go. Your analyse is absolutly right: It was a suicide scenario! But guess what: as a player, I had no idea of what kind of S... I was going into: To a old-timer D&D player, it all sounded OK: the money was good, the job easy, and the local lord not at all sympathetic to my PC. Further complaint should be directed to the original autor, Aka Sandy-the-Benevolent, and the GMs that carry out his evil plans ;-) >Added to the GMs total loss of much roleplay possibility there comes the problem >of 3 out of the eleven players (you indicated that three lived and eight PCs >died) would have finished the game playing. Actually, I am not even sur that Phillipes killed only 8. My memories are not that great, it was more than 10 years ago, but some players may have rerolled additional PCs after the previous one was killed, just to have them killed again a week later, when we continued playing (the scenario took more than one evening to complete). > the rest presumably went home of went to Pizza Hut because they had nothing to do. The alternative to that would >be rolling up new characters there and then, which in RQ is no alternative at >all. It takes half an hour usually to roll up a PC, plus over an hour to >research his background and his lineage. Yep, you got it. They did not went to pizza hut. They created new PCs. Some used to know the rules for creating a new PC by heart. > In addition to this, if we >play once a week, I'm not going to spend any time in game actualy doing anything >but game, otherwise nothing will get done. All PC creation and experience etc >should be done out of game if possible. That is, without the masterfull time management technique of our GM: while 3 players are running around, praying for dear life, the other are rolling new cannon-folder that appears conveniently for the next battle. >So my questions are, what does the group, the majority of which are sitting on >their thumbs for the whole time do? What does the GM do about his background? >What is done about the huge amount of GM work (new PCs, NPC backgounds etc) when Well, I guess he (the GM) will have to answer that himself. To his credit, I always liked his campaign. I retired my PC and started GMing only after he moves to another location. And after so many years, The only real vivid memory I have from our campaign is this scenario. It was so amazing, so incredible, so unbelivable to see at what rate the PC were dying, that we all went into shock. I mean, after AD&D, where killing one PC is almost obscene, what a change, Waooo! And after all, I survived :-) To get a really objective view, you would need to interview the owners of dead PCs. Fred ------------------------------ From: tickler@netcom.com (Brian Tickler) Date: Thu, 9 Nov 1995 11:23:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fudging... Martin writes: > Now technically speaking the PCs were aided in a big way here but they didn't > feel like children. They felt like warriors of their God, and supported by a > true Priest, they fought all the harder. Added to this, it gave them an example > to strive for. When Orvost was martyred, they all were very upset and annoyed. > They wouldn't have been if he hadn't interacted with them, in part by saving > their lives. I agree here. But I don't really consider every powerful NPC interaction to be a case of Deus Ex Machina, only the times when the NPC/bolt from the blue effect shows up at such a time or in such a manner that a 5-year old can tell that their butts have just been saved. > Brians example of Tarzan knocking the Avatar of Chaos of a cliff was apt I think Hey! That was George of the Jungle...I hate Tarzan... :) Fred writes: > >So, how do players get Climbing and Jumping checks in your campaign? > When they climb or jump, not when they walk, even if it is above a lava pit. Sorry, tunnel vision on my part. This is a perfect example of how two people talking about something picture it entirely differently. When you mentioned lava pits, I immediately pictured the typical scene where the party edges along the wall or carefully crosses the narrow "bridge", then comes to that inevitable spot where a gap exists and they must now long jump 30ft. in full plate and padding... > >In my game I usually ignore check-mongering > >attempts to Climb/Jump/whatever and only roll for the ones that count for > >something. > We call it "skill check hunt" when many players will try to use a skill just > in hope of a chance to increase, regardless of the actual result. I usually > don't fall for it Hmmm...I see potential here for a very amusing thread... What are everyone's examples of the worst check-mongering they've witnessed as a GM, and how did you handle it? In early times, I remember players with Humakti PCs often pulling out so many weapons during a battle they seemed like human swiss army knives... Which reminds me of another laugher I witnessed in someone else's campaign: has anyone else ever known people who played with the "Dagger Crossbow" as a valid Humakti weapon? > I don't think I can argue against that, and I am certainly not one to kill > my PCs on completly random events. I just think that the important point is > "the well-placed and subtle". I have played in a few campaigns where I > quickly realized that whatever I would do, my PC would never die, and I am > not in them anymore, it just does not interest me. So I think it's safe to say we agree then, as long as subtlety is maintained. Brent writes: > As written, RQ3 allows a few rounds of bleeding at 1 HP per round even on > massive criticals to the head. It always made assasination pretty > difficult in our games... Reading this tangent reminds me to point out that since I'm playing RQ2, - -6HP in Head, Chest, or Abdomen = instant death; which makes the subtle fudge an even more necessary tool in my game. Jim writes: > Since my omment preceded a remark about healing at Horngate, it should > have been obvious that it was directed to healing, not fighting. In fact, > Blueface (who is incredibly powerful and sometimes nice) has shown up 4 > times in a decade, and only twice to help the party -- once by a resurrection > and once by regrowing a limb, both of which cost (so to speak) an Arm and a > Leg! I'm not sure where the "every five minutes comes from! Still, whether it's fighting or healing or even stepping out of a secret door to whisper the one piece of information the party has to have, players usually resent it. Although I will admit that having a Berserk Storm Khan jump out of the shadows to split his 400% attack 8 ways, chopping the heads of all Broos that were decimating the party is a *hell* of a lot more irritating than having a Chalana Arroy Priestess happen by afterward looking for healing plants... Sandy writes: > To a slight extent, I fear I'm being taken for a "kind" GM, because > I give players subtle warnings of doom and sometimes fudge. Lest > anyone misunderstand, I _am_ the Sandy Petersen who wrote CALL OF > CTHULHU. (And DOOM.) I felt the same way, like admitting to the occasional fudge marks my/any campaign as some kind of cakewalk... :) (slowly buildy maniacal laughter). > Boy do I ever agree with Fred here. I HATE the savior NPCs. > I remember one campaign in which our characters were trying to rid > the valley of invading scorpion men. The GM, obviously feeling we > weren't up to handling the situation, provided us with a helpful > group of Tusk Rider mercenaries, who were unfailingly polite, > honored the Lunar Way, etc. I spent the entire campaign plotting > against the bastards. Their destruction was a MUCH higher priority > with me than the scorpion men's. > For that reason, I stay away from deux. When I do saddle my > PCs with an NPC, I always make him obnoxious or powerless or both. Even more infuriating is the GM who throws his powerful NPCs around and then adds insult to injury by fudging every other roll for them so that they never fail to succeed in the most "cool" fashion: "OK, S'longseeyalatyr the Stalwart, who's walking point, suddenly has a pit open under his feet...he makes a DEXx1 roll and straddles the pit without falling in...then, a Great Troll Krarsht Assassin bursts out of a pile of leaves that happen to be sitting nearby and attacks him! He could be in trouble now, since he has taken a solemn vow and doesn't wear armor or use weapons...he Dodges the Great Troll's Bladevenomed Poleaxe while straddling the pit, then transforms his left leg into a Dragon's claw and martial kicks him...in the head, critical, for 28 points of damage! Another Great Troll bursts out of a second pile of leaves you didn't notice before and starts to make a run for it...S'long grabs the dead Troll's head, still spinning in mid-air, and throws it at the fleeing assassin...crit! The other Troll falls down and into another pit! How ironic! S'long stands there for a moment, breathing deeply, then flips over the pit, landing in the lotus position, and starts to meditate on how cool he is......OK, does the party want to do anything?" Somebody needs to come up with an emoticon for slowly building maniacal laughter... - -- Brian T. Tickler E-Mail: tickler@netcom.com ------------------------------ End of RQ Rules Digest: V2 #115 ******************************* This is the bottom of the RuneQuest Rules Digest. RuneQuest is a trademark of Avalon Hill, and Glorantha is a trademark of Chaosium. With the exception of previously copyrighted material, unless specified otherwise all text in this digest is copyright by the author or authors, with rights granted to copy for personal use, to excerpt in reviews and replies, and to archive unchanged for electronic retrieval. Send electronic mail to Majordomo@hops.wharton.upenn.edu with "help" in the body of the message for subscription information on this and other mailing lists. WWW material at http://hops.wharton.upenn.edu/~loren/rolegame.html