From: owner-rq-rules-digest To: rq-rules-digest@hops.wharton.upenn.edu Subject: RQ Rules Digest: V2 #116 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 116 TABLE OF CONTENTS ANDOVER@delphi.com Killer scenario Rick Pim fudging (torg) martin 102541.3423@compuserv Killer Scenrios hasni@big10.metrobbs.com RQ Rules Digest: V2 #108 hasni@big10.metrobbs.com RQ Rules Digest: V2 #106 hasni@big10.metrobbs.com RQ Rules Digest: V2 #101 WillTwist@aol.com Beserkin Hugh Foster RQ Rules Digest: V2 #96 Sandy Petersen Fudging and Gaming 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: ANDOVER@delphi.com Date: Thu, 09 Nov 1995 14:25:08 -0500 (EST) Subject: Killer scenario When our group ran that Fonrit scenario, we had six new characters (it not being where we normally played). Three died, including both of mine! (We had 3 players each playing 2 characters). On the other hand, being a suspicious bunch, the 3 players figured it for a set-up from the get-go, but couldn't figure out what its purpose was! On the other hand, we were ready for a get-away, at least. The killer scenario "on the main line" for us, was of course, the Cradle. Half the characters involved died. On the other hand, they all knew how important it was, and took the risk with their eyes open. The survivors ended up wealthy. And for a break in the main sequence, some of us ran thief characters onto and off the Cradle while it was near Pavis. They made out reasonably, but only because in good thiefly tradition they were VERY cautious. Jim Chapin ------------------------------ From: Rick Pim Date: Thu, 09 Nov 1995 15:52:49 -0500 (EST) Subject: fudging (re: torg) > are Sandy Petersen >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. well, i ran a torg campaign for just shy of three years, so.... to echo something gawain said: this is unusual and has as much to do with the referee as anything. this actually ties in, sort of, with the current thread. someone commented that you want PCs to be in danger when it's "meaningful": you don't get MGF from being killed by a random critter. torg is meant to be fairly 'cinematic': PCs are expected to be able to do some pretty over-the-top things (a good example of a film with a pretty torgy feel is 'die hard' or 'raiders of the last ark'). in both cases, there are circumstances the hero handles easily and is unlikely to die but also places where they really do have to work and there is considerably more danger. the part that i find relevant here is that torg is about the first rpg that tried to merge this kind of thing into the game system itself. i don't think the choices and conventions used in torg would work in something as gritty and "realistic" as RQ. in both case, though, the PCs can be in as much danger as you like. with or without fudging. :-) rp ------------------------------ From: martin <102541.3423@compuserve.com> Date: 09 Nov 95 16:32:33 EST Subject: Killer Scenrios Fred said: >>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 ;-) It sounds like a one off, for a laugh, job to me. Thats okay, I like those from time to time, mortality is great in that kind of thing, but introducing such a scenario to a long running campaign where social interactions were very important would be a disaster! >Actually, I am not even sure 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). Hmmm, sounds like a PC conveyor belt to me. How did you build up any PC history and interaction when burning through your guys like that. Again, its okay for a one off but not okay for any non-slaughterfest campaign. >> 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. Thats fine, but it stil takes time and having a bunch of guys sitting in the corner of the room muttering PC creation stuff like "Strength 18 wahoo!, oh shit I've got a POW of three" etc is just a tad distracting. Besides I like my friends to come to a game to interact _together_, not by sitting apart rolling dice. Why even bother to play if thats what happens. After a few sessions of that I wouldn't show up anymore. I only see some of them once a week, at the game and game is all they want to do. >> 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. "Conveniently appear?" How, from where? A new PC would join a group that was hunted by everyone as murderers/assassins, with an army on their back. Where did the handy reserve of complete madmen and deathseekers come from. I always thought a PC joins others due to the pressures of a situation or a recognition of their abilities being able to help the individual through cooperation. This scenrio seems to preclude such an option. >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. Funny, I always found D&D characters so faceless and dull that it was simplicity itself to kill them without remorse. Of course, there are exceptions but on the whole RQ players tend to be perform better, I think the game and the background brings it out, latent though such talents are in the majority. Martin Laurie ------------------------------ From: hasni@big10.metrobbs.com Date: Thu, 2 Nov 1995 20:53:04 +0500 Subject: RQ Rules Digest: V2 #108 SUBJECT:CHEATING DM'S IR>> I don't believe in fudging the numbers in combat. Anytime IR>>"cheating" is used, even for the noblest motives, the game IR>>can get corrupted. If the players get wind of any non-randomness IR>>by the game master, a unfortunate roll can and will be a cause IR>>great strife and possibly lead to the destruction of the group. IR>>Now keep in mind, I am talking about important rolls such as combat IR>>and special encounters. One thing about "fudging" die rolls, is that DM's usually try to balance the adventure so it's challanging, but not overwheliming. However, unless we sit there with the character sheets and a little precognition, we don't allways do it. I've gotten in the situation where I've NOT wanted to do a critical hit on the sorcer with a great sword on round one of combat....I sorta counted on him making a parry or dodge and getting nickle and dimed. But since it's MY story, I decide it's just a special... Everybody has done it, even to the point of, "Gee, the big bad nasty guy shouldn't get taken down on round one by the sorcerers critcal hit with a dagger....I think he got a special parry..." Shrug, it happens, and we can't control what the players roll, but we can control how it affects the situation. Hasni Mubarak - --- þ OLX 2.1 TD þ Idiot congressman....Hey! That's redundant. ------------------------------ From: hasni@big10.metrobbs.com Date: Wed, 1 Nov 1995 10:04:10 +0500 Subject: RQ Rules Digest: V2 #106 Sorcery: I have a question about Sorcerers. If a sorcerer goes to all the trouble of making her familiar, and dumps the stats into it (i.e. say strenght, pow, and dex), would the player erase the numbers from the "original" number, or just write up the new score in the "current" slot. The reason this makes a difference, and probably what I should have said to begin with, is: Are the stats gone permanantly, or can they be "restored" with really heavy divine magic sorcerers usually don't have access to? Would it disrupt game balance much if I just decided to let them get it restored? (I.e. a PC becomes a RuneLord and can get Restore Dex, a Sorcerer does a BIG favor for him, can he ask for one or two points of Restore Dex?) Also, I've got a sorcer in my party who wants to become an Adept. What is a GOOD creature to make into a familiar? Are there any incomplete creatures that allrady have a bit of int but won't require him to butcher his character? Also, what is the deal with appearance? It says you don't need that Appearance stat for familiars....why not? I'm SURE I don't understand... Hasni Mubarak - --- þ OLX 2.1 TD þ I was bown in a cwossfiwe huwwicane-Jumpin J. Fudd ------------------------------ From: hasni@big10.metrobbs.com Date: Wed, 25 Oct 1995 10:36:00 +0500 Subject: RQ Rules Digest: V2 #101 Subject: Re: SR IR>>Besides just slowing the process down, I think SR cause problems like: I IR>>move up to someone for 5 SR, which adds +5 to my normal SR of 5 for SR 10. IR>>My opponent is SR 6. He can't hit me at all this round. Some people might IR>>argue that that accurately simulates something. OK, what if he was only 4 IR>>SR of movement away, but I waited for 1 SR before moving? How come getting IR>>a slow start, then rushing into battle gives me the advantage over just IR>>rushing in? In your example, you get there on strikerank 10, and Me, sitting there with my Long Spear would get to poke you on SR 9 and still get to parry you on 10, or I can hold my attack with my wooden club and bonk you on the head on SR 10. Depends on if I want to parry you or not. Besides, what's to stop me from stepping towards you when I see you charging me, and getting there in time for us both to attack and parry? - --- þ OLX 2.1 TD þ I stumbled over a stone and took it for granite. ------------------------------ From: WillTwist@aol.com Date: Tue, 24 Oct 1995 03:48:19 -0400 Subject: Re: Beserkin Personally I like the use of the spells to Berserk (fanatacism, etc., etc.) I think the casting time and the MP expenditure help demonstrate the expenditure of energy. Why should a Storm Bull be able to Go Berserk, gain all of the benefits from this, and then after the combat have full magic points to heal all of the friends he attacked in the middle of combat. I think that a non-magical version of berserking should be more restricted to role-playing with whatever benefits or detriments you as the GM whish to assign. However, I don't think much beats Berserkergang! I don't have the immense knowledge of Glorantha that many have here, but I can't quite see the followers of Babeester Gor going berserk in this manner. As the guardians of temples I can see them as ferocious defenders, however, I just can't see them jeopardizing the safety of the very people they are defending by going berserk in a temple with a very large axe! -- Will Johnson ------------------------------ From: Hugh Foster <100326.446@compuserve.com> Date: 23 Oct 95 20:57:22 EDT Subject: RQ Rules Digest: V2 #96 >> Obviously I need to be better at recordkeeping, but like you, I try to abstract a fair amount of stuff (not figuring MP until absolutely required, etc.). And I think this additional recordkeeping burden on the GM is not worth the delay in the game it imposes. << Yeah, I'd agree with that. Being a compufreak, I tend to generate bad guys in advance and have cute listings knocking about all over the place, which specifiy the MPs etc. However, in the dash and flow of the game, I tend to just wing their reserves based on how good I feel they are, rather than numbers. Most combats, nobody runs out of MP anyway; it's usually over _way_ before that stage.... HWF ------------------------------ From: Sandy Petersen Date: Thu, 9 Nov 95 17:25:58 -0600 Subject: Re: Fudging and Gaming Gawain >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 Oh we were all afraid for our lives too, at first. It took two or three sessions before we realized the awful truth. San ------------------------------ End of RQ Rules Digest: V2 #116 ******************************* 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