From: owner-rq-rules-digest To: rq-rules-digest@hops.wharton.upenn.edu Subject: RQ Rules Digest: V1 #171 Reply-To: rq-rules Errors-To: owner-rq-rules-digest Precedence: bulk Content-Return: Prohibited Return-Path: owner-rq-rules-digest RQ Rules Digest: Monday, 27 March 1995 Volume 01 : Number 171 RULES OF THE ROAD 1. Do not include large sections of a message in your reply. Especially not to say "Yeah, I agree." Those who do will be lynched. 2. Use an appropriate Subject line. 3. Do not engage in a point-by-point analysis or rebuttal of another person's message. It is too confusing for others to follow, qualifies as nit-picking, and it usually leads to flame wars. 4. There is no number 4. TABLE OF CONTENTS Gregory C. Walsh smaug Loren Miller SRs revisited Peter Donald SRs and Shamans SPerrin@aol.com Crits and specials. Paul Reilly RQ Rules Digest: V1 #169 Paul Heinz Criticals et al. owner-rq-rules@hops.wharton. [none] Majordomo Paul Reilly on linear armor SPerrin@aol.com Steve's not so good crit ... SPerrin@aol.com Skills; Criticals; Smaug SPerrin@aol.com Heroic/mundane Bruce Lionel Mason Skills; Criticals; Smaug Bruce Lionel Mason Crits and specials. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Gregory C. Walsh" Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 11:40:33 -0500 Subject: smaug I see smaug surviving an attack on a town. Someone has been playing war hammer to much. This is a role playing game. I think you underestimate the psycological impact of a dragon attack. Smaug is sheer terror. In a role playing game, you see, gaurds are people with lives they care about, maybe even families and so forth. You can't march them over cliffs like lemmings. Let me illustrate. Suppose *you* are a gaurd in a large town, say 400 to 500 souls. Playing bones with your buddies in the gaurd tower, some evening after sun set, say 9 pm or so. The sergeant runs in yelling, "dragon attack! Everyone to the walls!". Seriously folks, this would qualify as a big morale problem. Army people know this, that is why they recruit 18 year olds cause they can be talked into going out on the ramparts more easily than guys in their mid to late 20's. Let's think about this from a cool and calculating perspective, something the gaurd doesn't have the luxery to do. Dragons can fly damned fast. Your bow shoots a moving target effectively say 100 meters. A strech at night, say more like 60 meters. You know that if smaug goes for your rampart you will get one bow shot off maybe before he breathes and kills you. Smaug's armor is invincible as far as you know. (24 point scales generally look that way). You are looking at pretty much certain death in the face, even if you do happen to kill smaug. You and you friends are all say, 60% with the bow, so that is 3% crit chance. Which is to say there is a 97% chance that you won't crit. Which is to say that you and your 12 buddies won't crit 70% of the time. And who says even if you do it will kill the dragon. Probably need a couple of crits to kill it. These gaurds are not going to go out on the ramparts, and get fried. They are going to crawl into the deepest whole they know about and hope smaugh eats someone else and goes away. If the sergeant starts trying to force everyone out to the ramparts, I figure the guards will jump him and send him out to the ramparts as a sacrifice to smaug. Only a hero would go out on the ramparts and take a pot shot at smaug. A heroic sergeant might be able to lead his unit to their inevitable deaths. In my world, the PC's are among the few heroic figures. And dragons are terror-mongers. Think about Odyssius and the choice between two evils. He could steer his ship betweent he clashing rocks, and perhaps loose everyone or no one, or sail past the lair of the hydra, and loose a half dozen sailors for sure. He chose the hydra. Hoping it was someone else. Human nature. See you in the dragon shelter deep under ground. "Too bad the sergeant got eaten by the dragons before we managed to get in here". In anycase, dragons are rife with magic. PErhaps smaug has 4 or 5 air elementals flying with him as arrow shields. Greg Walsh ------------------------------ From: "Loren Miller" Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 12:11:54 EST Subject: Re: SRs revisited Simon Lee writes: >The Elric system offers a workable (and simple) alternative to strike >ranks[...] Briefly, the system involves: > >using DEX values to determine order of attacks (higest DEX goes >first, followed by next highest, etc.) > >using INT values to determine order of spellcasting in combat Note that Elric! incorporates another rule that you left out, and which I think is necessary for any realistic replacement combat system. If someone has a longer weapon then he attacks before his opponent and gets two attacks for each of his opponent's. If the opponent successfully closes on the long weapon then the advantage is reversed. - -- +++++++++++++++++++++++23 Loren Miller LOREN@marketing.wharton.upenn.edu Life at the water's edge is the real life for men and women ------------------------------ From: "Peter Donald" Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 12:41:13 -0400 (EDT) Subject: SRs and Shamans In message Mon, 27 Mar 1995 11:16:03 -0500, simon.lee@digitec.co.za (Simon Lee) wrote: > Has anyone else tried using Elric rules (combat or otherwise) with RQ? Yep. > I would be interested in hearing other opinions on how well the two > systems interface. Beautifully in my experience. Graft RQ magic onto the Elric rules, and the combination works extremely well. Speaking of magic, has anybody else out there taken a look at GURPS Voodoo? I'm not a big GURPS fan (far from it, in fact), but there's some extremely interesting stuff in this book - anybody looking to spice up shamanism would be well advised to at least flip through a copy next time you're in your local game store. From my initial reading it looks like much of the material would translate into RQ terms quite easily. - -- Liberty without socialism is privilege and injustice, and that socialism without liberty is slavery and brutality. M. Bakunin ------------------------------ From: SPerrin@aol.com Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 13:03:23 -0500 Subject: Re: Crits and specials. Just so everyone remembers: Mike Cule suggests: >Perhaps a player who rolled a crit might be allowed to choose between an impale or an armour bypassing blow, depending which would be more deadly in the circumstances.< The RQAIG rules still say that a critical gets the special's double damage (which HAS to be changed to a set extra damage, IMNSHO), and then gives the player a choice between ignoring armor or choosing hit location. At this point, I think the critical should give the choice of the special's extra damage, OR ignoring armor, OR choosing the Hit Location, OR doing some kind of special juju like disarming the foe. (though actually a disarm should be something that the character can attempt rather than just luck into...). Thus, the critical becomes just a more varied special. Then again, we could drop the special entirely and move the crit (using the above criteria) up to the 10% chance... Steve Perrin ------------------------------ From: paul@phyast.pitt.edu (Paul Reilly) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 13:06:14 +0500 Subject: Re: RQ Rules Digest: V1 #169 Paul Reilly here. Steve Barnes wrote: >A long time ago, I was trying to make a system where your success >level gave you a certain number of "damage options". The options >were things like: increased damage, choose hit location, disarm, >extra attack, etc. I was unsure where to put "bypass armor" in >this system. I think I had decided that it cost 2 options, This is a very good idea! Unfortunately I am not running a campaign right now or I'd try to playtest it right away. Please work on it more and post the result! Options could vary by weapon type (e.g. a chain type weapon could entangle, a sword could impale or slash, etc.) Be sure to include some options for friendly duels and capture situations (do knockback/knockdown, stun damage only, pick location, etc.) This could simplify things, actually...I like this better than a set of special skills. (Because it's simpler) -paul ------------------------------ From: "Paul Heinz" Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 10:24:03 -1200 Subject: Criticals et al. Paul Heinz here. Firstly, let me state that my gm/player ratio is 99/01 . Regarding Steve Perrin's mechanic of criticals being determined by rolling maximum damage and keeping on adding i.e. "open-ended rolling": As I understand it, Steve, you weren't advocating this damage mechanic as well as ignoring armour on such open ended rolls were you? Anyway, the net result of the change (if my statistics and algebra haven't failed me) is to raise any damage rolls as per the following formula: Let E be the normal expected value of the roll (i.e the usual average, 2d6 = 7) Let D be the degrees of freedom of the roll (i.e. the number of possible rolls, 2d6 = 6x6 = 36) E(open) = E + ( E / ( D - 1) ) e.g. 1d3 = 2 + (2 / (3 - 1)) = 2 + 1 = 3.0 e.g. 1d6 = 3.5 + (3.5 / (6 - 1)) = 3.5 + .7 = 4.2 e.g. 2d3 = 4 + (4 / (9 - 1)) = 4 + .5 = 4.5 e.g. 2d6 = 7 + (7 / (36 - 1)) = 7 + .2 = 7.2 I think this kind of mechanic works in systems which use a common roll (i.e. a single d10) to base ALL damage rolls or always a single die as otherwise the system is VERY variable with different individuals with wholly different chances of "criticalling". The damage distribution is also very "lumpy" when high numbers of dice are rolled i.e. when rolling 3d6, I have to roll 18 to get a critical but if I do, I now add another 3d6 to my 18. Yowee! A less "lumpy" mechanic allows any die which rolls maxiumum to be rolled again and added thus when rolling 3d6, any 6 is rolled again. This makes the critical distrubtion much fairer for high dice rolls but I think the reduced chance for high numbers of dice in the original proposal was intended as a "feature" and not a "bug" :-) Secondly, the mooted change of making having specials/criticals merged into a single category namely, 1/10 of skill and the proposal to have criticals only on 01 or 02 if > 100% can be combined and are essentially the rules that Elric! uses (if I remember rightly). Rolls under or equal 1/10 of skill are called "Critical" and do double damage (i.e. like a special) whereas an impaling weapon rolling 01 is an "Impale" which does double damage AND ignores armour. Dodges and parries in Elric! use the "reduce level of success of the attack" mechanic and you can do more than 1 per round. A successful parry wholely blocks a normal attack, reduces a critical attack to a normal attack and non-shields lose 2 HP, etc. Overall, you can basically ignore weapon APs which is a nice simplification. Interestingly enough, a large number of Elric! GMs are using the Elric! rules as generic fantasy rules as they like the elegance of the system even if they don't like the Young Kingdoms. This is the same market that generic RQ is supposed to break into... Steve (as in Perrin, there's a lot of Steves around here ;-) were you party to the Elric! rules? Have you had a chance to flick through them? TTFN, Paul "RuneLord" Heinz - -- ===================================================================== Paul Heinz paul@profax.co.nz Auckland, New Zealand. ------------------------------ From: owner-rq-rules@hops.wharton.upenn.edu Date: Thu, 23 Mar 1995 17:10:41 +0100 Subject: [none] unsubscribe rq-rules burtin@loria.fr ------------------------------ From: Majordomo Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 15:26:10 -0500 (EST) Subject: Paul Reilly on linear armor Another message of interest to t he list sent to the list owner. Forwarded message: > From: paul@phyast.pitt.edu (Paul Reilly) > Apparently-To: owner-rq-rules-digest@hops.wharton.upenn.edu > > Paul Reilly here. > The proposed "lower of magical and armor protection counts half" rule is > really part of the exponential vs. linear stats debate in disguise... > Armor is already nonlinear - plate is more than eight times as hard to > punch through as soft leather, etc. > All for now, must go - p > ------------------------------ From: SPerrin@aol.com Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 18:56:04 -0500 Subject: Re: Steve's not so good crit ... Steve Barnes had some good things to say about criticals and specials, but insisted on fostering the mistaken idea that the idea of basing criticals on damage rolled instead of to hit roll was Sandy's bad idea. It was mine, Steve Perrin's, and Sandy doesn't need the responsibility heaped on him. And for those who are wondering, including Paul Heinz who did the mathmatical analysis, I have pretty much given up on the idea. Ignore it, it didn't happen. Mostly, the numbers have some major problems and it adds a new mechanism instead of following my original path of trying to make more things use the same system. Steve (Sandy's over on the Glorantha Digest) Perrin ------------------------------ From: SPerrin@aol.com Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 18:56:20 -0500 Subject: Re: Skills; Criticals; Smaug Colin Watson really hates Criticals and says: >All I'm saying is that there comes a time when 01% is not a crit. The chance of a crit should be an order of magnitude lower. Shit happens, yes. But not *that* often.< But really good blows happen fairly often in a combat, though usually only once to each recipient. Perhaps the need is to increase the chance of Criticals, remove the chance of specials, and make sure criticals are just rea lly good, not devastating. All ideas I've been talking about elsewhere. In a bell-curve systems, such as Hero's, a true critical would be a one-in-216 chance: the roll of 3 on 3d6. It generally happens about once an evening. ------------------------------ From: SPerrin@aol.com Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 18:56:17 -0500 Subject: Re: Heroic/mundane Bruce Mason offers a system of combining cinematic and realistic elements in RuneQuest: >The ... addition was Hero Points. I think everyone started with 3 and agained 3-5 after each module depending on how heroic etc they had been. You use Hero Points to alter the success level of *your* roll, each Hero Point increases the level by one, eg fumble becomes fail, fail becomes success and so on. The player however has to decide before the roll whether or not to spend hero points and how many. Once you spend your HPs they're gone until you get some more.< I've read games that use Hero Points and played in a couple (notably Star Wars' Force Points). I think the mechanic works very well, and wouldn't mind seeing some aspect of it attached as an option to the Rules. Perhaps this could be another method of enhancing the use of "Runes"? One could gain Rune Points so that he could later pull off something spectacular having to do with the Rune. Death points would make blows more effective, Motion points would help movement, Fire points would assist against problems dealing with fire. A very complex variation, I'm afraid, but maybe very useful for some campaigns. Steve Perrin ------------------------------ From: Bruce Lionel Mason Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 21:08:48 -0330 Subject: Re: Skills; Criticals; Smaug The ongoing debate. I think we've got to figure out whether RQ (or any rpg system come to that) is supposed to provide a model for a world or whether it should be a playable game. If the system is supposed to be a model for the world then we have to decide which of the thousands of fictional worlds or the `real' one it is supposed to model. That system then has to accurately describe in terms of rules and random factors everything from a lion stalking a zebra, the odds on me not making a typo in this email and how many trollkin it takes to kill a rune lord. If you do this for the real world you will win a Nobel prize :-) Obviously I favour the simplistic assertion that RQ is game and when it comes down to it game design and playability aesthetics have to take precedence. I would say that one of the canonical features of RQ (and BRP in general) is the ability to do perform exception feats (and cock ups) on a dice roll. Furthermore they come up a lot more frequently than real life. As any theatre director will tell you the art of creating a realistic illusion usually requires unealistic performances. I play a system where criticals happen 1/10 times on a successful roll. Such criticals are about as powerful as RQ3 specials but slightly more flexible. This is by no means realistic but my players like it, it's easy to teach, fairly easy to compute, it adds fun to the game and creates memorable moments when you least expect it. I could be persuaded to an NPC critical rule which is that NPCs<100% crit on a 01 and NPCs>100% crit on a 01-02 which makes NPC crits kind of like a PC fumble but normally I just fudge the dice rolls occasionally. I do think that crits and fumbles are such an integral part of RQ that if you take them out, or make them so rare as to almost never occur, you might as well play a different system and there are lot of things (IMHO) that need to be fixed before crits. - ---Bruce ------------------------------ From: Bruce Lionel Mason Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 21:15:52 -0330 Subject: Re: Crits and specials. On Mon, 27 Mar 1995, Mike Cule wrote: > Yes, I'd like to support this as an idea for RQ4. It would still make > RQ combat deadly but not as overwhelmingly deadly as it is at the > moment. Perhaps a player who rolled a crit might be allowed to choose > between an impale or an armour bypassing blow, depending which would > be more deadly in the circumstance. This is basically the system I've been using. I don't have specials, crits are 1/10 and on a crit you can chose double damage (though I will convert to Steve's dam+10 idea I think), OR ignore armor. I also allow other options such as ignoring parry APs, choose a hit location etc. It seems to work pretty well. > Mike Cule - ---Bruce. ------------------------------ End of RQ Rules Digest: V1 #171 ******************************* 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.