Babyl Options: Append:1 Version:5 Reformat-Headers-P Summary-Window-Format: Use Default  0,, *** EOOH *** Received: from NOC1.DCCS.UPENN.EDU by deepthought.cs.utexas.edu (5.64/1.2/relay) with SMTP id AA19248; Wed, 19 May 93 16:37:30 -0500 Return-Path: Received: from MKT46.WHARTON.UPENN.EDU by noc1.dccs.upenn.edu id AA19462; Wed, 19 May 93 17:36:45 -0400 Received: from WMKT/TEMPQ by mkt46.wharton.upenn.edu (Mercury 1.0); Wed, 19 May 93 17:36:46 EDT From: mabeyke@batman.b11.ingr.com (boris) To: "RuneQuest IV Playtest Discussion" Subject: Strike Rank Breakpoints Date: Wed, 19 May 93 16:38:27 CDT Reply-To: rq-playtest@mkt46.wharton.upenn.edu Sender: Listserv@mkt46.wharton.upenn.edu X-Mailer: Mercury MTA v1.0. Message-Id: <2F8A0C6F1C@mkt46.wharton.upenn.edu> Well, I'll try to start a thread here. As Nick Brooke reminded us in today's (5/19/93) RQ Daily, the current SR system has awkward stat based breakpoints, among other problems. Now, one possible fix for this is the alternate SR system proposed by George Harris on the net last year. In anyone hasn't seen that, I'll include it here. Skip on down for further discussion if you're familiar with it. <<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: gharris@jade.tufts.edu (George W. Harris) Subject: RQ: Changes to the Strike Rank Calculation Method Date: 13 Aug 92 12:06:26 GMT As most of you probably know, when one attacks with a melee or missile weapon and when a spell takes effect are in a large part determined by one's Dex and Siz strike rank modifiers. The underlying assumtion of this mechanic is that the more dextrous one is the sooner one acts, and the larger one is the quicker one lands a blow in melee. I am not going to contest these assumtions, but rather try and streamline how they are implemented. Characteristic Dex Strike Siz Strike Rank Modifier Rank Modifier 1-5 5 4 6-9 4 3 10-15 3 2 16-19 2 1 20+ 1 0 Ordinarily, when one is using a missile weapon (or casting a spell), one acts on Dex Strike Rank (plus the magic points in the spell), and when one is using a melee weapon, one acts on the sum of Dex Strike Rank and Siz Strike Rank and Weapon Strike Rank. These are the main uses of the Dex/Siz Strike Rank table. However, there are two things that should strike you about this table: One: It is not an even progression. The steps alternate in size between four and six, rather than being a constant five. Two: Siz Strike Rank alone is never used for anything, but is only used in conjunction with Dex Strike Rank. The first item is easy to fix. Just make the intervals 1-4, 5-9, 10-14, 15-19, 20+. As for the second, I propose replacing the Siz Strike Rank column with a combined Dex+Siz Strike Rank column to be used for figuring melee strike rank. As the table stands, someone with a Dex 10 and Siz 10 would have a melee strike rank of 5. However, someone with Dex 9 and Siz 11 would have a melee strike rank of 6, as would someone with Dex 11 and Siz 9. Since, the way the system is structured, Siz and Dex are equally important in figuring melee strike rank, this result doesn't seem proper. Therefore, I propose using the following table for figuring melee strike rank: Combined Siz+Dex Melee Strike Rank 2-4 9 5-9 8 10-14 7 15-19 6 20-24 5 25-29 4 30-34 3 35-39 2 40+ 1 The advantages of this table are that it eliminates the standard optimal breakpoints for Siz and Dex, and also regularizes the progression. One could complain that it is undesirable for a table to use the sum of two characteristics, but as the damage bonus table already does this, that objection doesn't stand. Of course, one would still use the Dex Strike Rank table to figure strike ranks for spells and missile weapons. -- "If you take cranberries and stew them like applesauce, they taste more like prunes than rhubarb does." -Groucho Marx gharris@jade.tufts.edu George Harris, Tufts Univ. Dept. of Mathematics <<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Now, my group and myself have been using this rule for a while now, and it works well with one correction. With the normal human range of SIZ, everything is copacetic, but if you start using this with trolls, giants, and scorpionmen, those with SIZ>>20 pose the following problem. If the creatures DEX SR is less than their SIZ SR in the old system, the new will give them a melee SR less than their DEX SR. In other words, they could hit with a maul before they could throw an axe. This is fixed by just ruling that any SIZ > 20 uses SIZ=20 in the Melee SR table. In this case, their Melee SR would equal their DEX SR, which gives the same result as the current system. With this fix, this system works well, and eliminates the tendancy for all fighters to be at SIZ16, DEX16, or some such. -- Boris Mikey, aka |"Here the ways of men part: if you wish to strive Maurice Beyke | for peace of soul and pleasure, then believe; if mabeyke@ingr.com | you wish to be a devotee of truth, then inquire." Intergraph doesn't want Nietzsche my opinions.  0,, *** EOOH *** Received: from NOC1.DCCS.UPENN.EDU by deepthought.cs.utexas.edu (5.64/1.2/relay) with SMTP id AA10675; Wed, 26 May 93 17:06:27 -0500 Return-Path: Received: from MKT46.WHARTON.UPENN.EDU by noc1.dccs.upenn.edu id AA21946; Wed, 26 May 93 18:05:50 -0400 Received: from WMKT/TEMPQ by mkt46.wharton.upenn.edu (Mercury 1.0); Wed, 26 May 93 18:06:05 EDT From: "Loren Miller" To: "RuneQuest IV Playtest Discussion" Subject: RQIV: tithes Date: 26 May 93 18:03:14 EDT Reply-To: rq-playtest@mkt46.wharton.upenn.edu Sender: Listserv@mkt46.wharton.upenn.edu X-Mailer: Mercury MTA v1.0. Message-Id: I have a question about tithes. It seems to me that the RQ rules at present are overly mathematical about tithes and other cult rules. For instance the mastery rules would assume that people can somehow measure exactly how good they are at skills. Also, tithes assume that people know how to divide by ten, which might not be something that innumerate people can do. How about changing tithes so that, for instance, instead of tithing 10% of income a farmer initiate would tithe five chickens and ten bushels of grain per year, or some such combination? A noble, assumed to be wealthy, might tithe 5 fully equipped soldiers, 100 bushels of grain, 50 chickens, two cattle, a hogshead of cider, and fifteen yards of linen cloth. The tax, ahem errm I mean tithe, would be paid every year. For mastery and other levels of skill, how about changing the definition so that the master, in order to be recognized as a master, would have to succeed at 5 out of 5 skill tests? This borrows an idea that I saw in "Tales" a while ago. I haven't heard much about it recently. Someone who had passed the test could join professional guilds and charge full price for training, while someone who had not passed the test might very well be over 100% with the skill, but was unlucky in the testing circumstances. It also allows politics to play a part in mastery tests, which would explain some of the losers who show up in real life organizations. Even if the rules themselves do not change to reflect this, I *do* think that changes along these lines should be suggested somewhere in the rule book. Where else in play could we disengage characters away from the underlying rules? -- +++++++++++++++++++++++23 Loren Miller LOREN@wmkt.wharton.upenn.edu There's a thin line between TQM and Mutiny  0,, *** EOOH *** Received: from NOC4.DCCS.UPENN.EDU by deepthought.cs.utexas.edu (5.64/1.2/relay) with SMTP id AA18339; Wed, 2 Jun 93 10:40:49 -0500 Return-Path: Received: from MKT46.WHARTON.UPENN.EDU by noc4.dccs.upenn.edu id AA24921; Wed, 2 Jun 93 11:40:37 -0400 Received: from WMKT/TEMPQ by marketest.wharton.upenn.edu (Mercury 1.0); Wed, 2 Jun 93 11:40:39 EDT From: jjm@zycor.lgc.com (johnjmedway) To: "RuneQuest IV Playtest Discussion" Subject: RQIV: tithes Date: Wed, 26 May 93 17:55:15 CDT Reply-To: rq-playtest@marketest.wharton.upenn.edu Sender: Listserv@marketest.wharton.upenn.edu X-Mailer: Mercury MTA v1.0. Message-Id: <7286894CA6@marketest.wharton.upenn.edu> >> From: "Loren Miller" >> Subject: RQIV: tithes >> Date: 26 May 93 18:03:14 EDT >> >> For mastery and other levels of skill, how about changing the >> definition so that the master, in order to be recognized as a >> master, would have to succeed at 5 out of 5 skill tests? This borrows I think this is an excellent idea, for guild qualification and also for Initiate/Rune Lord/Priest requirements. A requirement of 50% would be satisfied by the character demonstrating competance, but being allowed to fail or come up short (2 out of 4 must be successes...). It may also be a good idea to allow a critical to count double in these tests goals (after a particularly impressive display - one way or the other - the judges say "We've seen enough, you're in (out)." >> Even if the rules themselves do not change to reflect this, I *do* >> think that changes along these lines should be suggested somewhere in >> the rule book. This is the way the tithe system should be worked over. It would be too difficult to provide divergent enough levels of contributions for the different societies and for the different strata therein. I'd say leave the 10% rule as is, BUT state what each of the temples would want: Yelmalio: Barley, corn, birds,... Zorak Zoran: Mushrooms, beetles, trollkin slaves,... The 10% should be _roughly_ translated into appropriate gifts, not filled out and mailed in with a 1040 tithe form. >> Where else in play could we disengage characters away from the >> underlying rules? Well, there's always the POW gain debate and the prefab prayer/DI in a can (ye olde Rune/Divine magic system). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - ---john j medway----------- - - - - -- - - - - - - ---jmedway@zycor.lgc.com--- - - - - - - - -- --- - - - - - - ---landmark/zycor---------- - - - - - - - --- ---- - - ---512/292-2325------------ - - - ---- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------  0,, *** EOOH *** Received: from NOC4.DCCS.UPENN.EDU by deepthought.cs.utexas.edu (5.64/1.2/relay) with SMTP id AA18367; Wed, 2 Jun 93 10:42:17 -0500 Return-Path: Received: from MKT46.WHARTON.UPENN.EDU by noc4.dccs.upenn.edu id AA24924; Wed, 2 Jun 93 11:40:39 -0400 Received: from WMKT/TEMPQ by marketest.wharton.upenn.edu (Mercury 1.0); Wed, 2 Jun 93 11:40:40 EDT From: jjm@zycor.lgc.com (johnjmedway) To: "RuneQuest IV Playtest Discussion" Subject: RQ4: Time and the Great Compromise Date: Wed, 26 May 93 17:32:29 CDT Reply-To: rq-playtest@marketest.wharton.upenn.edu Sender: Listserv@marketest.wharton.upenn.edu X-Mailer: Mercury MTA v1.0. Message-Id: <72869161BA@marketest.wharton.upenn.edu> Actually it has to do with RQ4 improvements in the character generation system (over RQ3). Has anyone collected any statistics on how long characters of point value X take to create, under RQ4? I've only done two characters, now, and admittedly, both were moderately complex, but the times seemed VERY high. I mean high enough to really turn people off of the game. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - ---john j medway----------- - - - - -- - - - - - - ---jmedway@zycor.lgc.com--- - - - - - - - -- --- - - - - - - ---landmark/zycor---------- - - - - - - - --- ---- - - ---512/292-2325------------ - - - ---- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------