From: owner-rq-rules-digest To: rq-rules-digest@hops.wharton.upenn.edu Subject: RQ Rules Digest: V1 #175 Reply-To: rq-rules Errors-To: owner-rq-rules-digest Precedence: bulk Content-Return: Prohibited Return-Path: owner-rq-rules-digest RQ Rules Digest: Friday, 31 March 1995 Volume 01 : Number 175 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 Styopa Critical Hits, Skills, etc. Styopa COP and initiative Styopa Publishing RQ related material David Cake Publishing RQ related material yfcw29@castle.ed.ac.uk Death and disability. Gregory C. Walsh ?!# Sorcery Rules. Kevin Rose Headshots and crits Soren Petersen Headshots and crits SPerrin@aol.com Headshots and crits SPerrin@aol.com ?!# Sorcery Rules. Bryan J. Maloney Hitting yourself ANDOVER@delphi.com Criticals Styopa Death and disability. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Styopa" Date: Fri, 31 Mar 95 00:01:54 CST Subject: Re: Critical Hits, Skills, etc. On Wed, 29 Mar 1995 17:35:25 -0500, SPerrin@aol.com wrote: >Oh, I've added a very rough system of allowing more character creation points >if the PC takes various disadvantages/problems. These Problem Points can >alternately be applied to Background points for getting skills and magic. Personally, I'm strongly against "build your character by points" systems. They beg to be min-maxed. You end up with every "fighter" type having 18 STR, every sorcerer having 18 INT, etc, etc. until you are playing Angels and Archetypes. I like characters rolling themselves up, maybe allowing a little judicious modifications by the ref & player working to gether to fit the background, but basically rolled characters. - -Steve ------------------------------ From: "Styopa" Date: Fri, 31 Mar 95 00:02:02 CST Subject: Re: COP and initiative >I allow one arrow per 3 SR (figuring getting an arrow from >a quiver the same as drawing a sword) so archers usually >get two shots a round. (BTW The RQ3 rules say 1/SR, which >seems crazy - can an archer really fire ten arrows in a >combat round ? A minute ? If this is true, archers would >clear the board... Can someone clear my view on that.) 1/SR = 1 per Dex SR +3 to draw new arrow. So, your DEX21 archer gets 3 shots per round (if ready at the beginning) on 1, 5 and 9. ------------------------------ From: "Styopa" Date: Fri, 31 Mar 95 00:02:14 CST Subject: Re: Publishing RQ related material On Wed, 29 Mar 95 08:10:36 cst, mdouglas_at_AIGWHQ@mailhost.aig.com wrote: > >>>Try reaching them at "ahrpg@aol.com". > >So, without talking directly to them, does anyone know their present status for >third party support of RuneQuest?? I tried this awhile back and had a very >confusing set of responses. I have more material, but Im wondering if its worth >polishing up if it's got nowhere to go. > >Mike Douglas > > >aka mdouglas@aig.com >aka that-mean-ole-killer-GM > > my exprience with the AH gang is that they are practically TSR when it comes to using "their" trademarked names or copyrights. Very stingy, very, very lawyerly. Very much dorks. If you ask them, you give them a chance to say no. IMHO, if you ask them about something, and they sense even slightly that THEY could do the same thing and make $.01, you'll get a resounding NO! (Not that they ever will get to it, it's the potential of the thing...) Don't get me wrong- I like some of their games, and frankly, RQ would not bewhere it is without their investment in art, etc. But they are run by their lawyers, like any big corp. - -Steve ------------------------------ From: davidc@cs.uwa.edu.au (David Cake) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 1995 14:16:51 +0800 Subject: Re: Publishing RQ related material >Don't get me wrong- I like some of their games, and frankly, RQ would not >bewhere it is without their investment in art, etc. HA! They only got decent art because they were getting so many complaints, including from all their writers, that the art was crap. Before then they had been making their graphic designer do it all (hence the appalling art of Dave Dobyski - he is not an artist - but why pay two people to do a good job, when you can pay one person to do an awful job?). But they are run by >their lawyers, like any big corp. And they are not that big. The printing side of the business (Monarch Publishing), keep it alive, I hear. This is all unsubstantiated rumour of little or no reliability. Cheers Dave >-Steve ------------------------------ From: yfcw29@castle.ed.ac.uk Date: Fri, 31 Mar 95 15:25:43 BST Subject: Death and disability. Graeme Lindsell says : >I still thinks it's easier to kill someone than to knock >them out, or to disable them without damage, and that Steve's original >suggestion was way too gross. Have you ever seen casualty statistics for different types of combat? Even for firefights, nonlethal incapacitation is far more common that death. At least in the short term anyway. Death from shock, blood loss or infection is by far the highest cause of death from wounding. It is very rarely over as quickly as the RQ rules imply. Elric copes with this problem quite nicely. If a character takes a major would (half hit points or more in one go) the character is incapacitated for a few rounds, and must roll on the major wound effects table. Nice and quick! Colin Watson says : >Well, we won't mention the fact that the modifier for Moving Target is >probably broken too. It's completely counteracted by the dragon's size. I trhink there is a modifier for very large targets too. Simon Hibbs yfcw29@castle.ed.ac.uk ------------------------------ From: "Gregory C. Walsh" Date: Fri, 31 Mar 1995 12:18:48 -0500 Subject: ?!# Sorcery Rules. One of my players (and ex-D&Der) is hell bound to play a sorcerer. Which is great, of course. I have decided to use the Presence system as posted earlier on this group by, I think, Steve Perrin and company. I will mix in the vessel system a little. I see two immediate consequences of this system. With "Maintain", many Novices will use all of their presence up just to keep up a few points of spells, since their casting chances in a stress situation is low anyhow. They will cast their spell (say damage boosting or enhance str) well ahead of time and then don their armor and live thier lives. (Novice = beginer, 1 - 5 Presence, low casting chances). The other is that Adept level magic users are deadly. With multispell and speed, they can toss huge numbers of, say, Palsey 6's in a really short amount of time (say 4 or 5 a melee round). Of course, they are burning magic points like crazy. I have two weeks before these rules must solidify for the player. (We play again in two weeks). I am open to suggestions and would like to hear people's experiences in running games with these rules. I really dislike changing rules on players so I really only have two weeks. The player, who is tired of playing lawful good cleric types, is probbly going to go the wicked route. Tap being his current favorite. Greg Walsh ------------------------------ From: Kevin Rose Date: Fri, 31 Mar 1995 11:21:47 -0600 (CST) Subject: Headshots and crits > > It not only depends on how the weapon is used, but what kind of weapon it is > (rarely addressed in RPG's). For instance, it would be nearly impossible for me > (a somewhat heafty guy) to kill someone with a biljack or an asp without some > pretty excessive beating sessions....on the other hand, even flat-blading > someone with a broadsword is likely to crush their skull. The latter would be > no different than using a crowbar or some other similarly heavy and solid > object. > > PS-the trick to being an anesthesiologist is anesthesizing your patients without > leaving large dents in their heads (plastic surgeory patients really hate this). Let me phrase this differently: If you can reliably and effectively knock someone unconcious with a sap without any chance of killing them, why was this never done for surgery? Why was ether considered a giant breakthough when all they had to do was ask joe the thug to knock out their patients? All sorts of really nasty things tend to happen from blows to the head sufficent to knock people out. The problem is that you are knocked unconcious by the brain being bounced around. This often results in bruising and swelling. These effects are refered to as concusions and subdural hematomas (sp). They are generally considered to be somewere between bad and fatal, depending on just what what extent and which particular areas of the brain are affected. > > Don't forget the blighter's moving at whatever ludicrous > > speed it takes to keep about a hundred tons of dragon > > airborne on relatively small wings. > > Well, we won't mention the fact that the modifier for Moving Target is > probably broken too. It's completely counteracted by the dragon's size. > > > Oh! how I regret ever bringing dragons into this discussion. > > My reasons were twofold: > 1/ to show how crits can rob a scene of its epic drama. > 2/ to show impact of crits on the world. How about this then: Every time a particularly large character of mine kicks someone sucessfully he has a one chance in 20 of maiming them, no matter how much armor they are wearing. Is this "realistic"? How about a guy in plate armor vs 40 houscats? What to take bets on the human living to kill all the cats? Ok, the cats are silly. But anyway, consider 200 horse archers firing for 10 minutes. How many crits and specials are there if you assume 80% skill and only 5 arrows per minute/man? Doesn't 400 crits and 1600 impales seem a little gross? Makes cavalry vs horse archers a pretty silly proposition. (And for detail fanatics, Mongols are supposed to have carried 60-200 arrows on their horses with them.) Kevin BTW: Does anyone remember the name of the game where the most lethal weapon was a handful of loose rice? One of the grains was bound to get a 01, which killed anything. Timemaster? ------------------------------ From: soren@elsinore.ping.dk (Soren Petersen) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 1995 22:06:22 +0100 Subject: Re: Headshots and crits Kevin Rose writes: >Ok, the cats are silly. But anyway, consider 200 horse archers firing for 10 >minutes. How many crits and specials are there if you assume 80% skill >and only 5 arrows per minute/man? Doesn't 400 crits and 1600 impales seem >a little gross? Makes cavalry vs horse archers a pretty silly >proposition. (And for detail fanatics, Mongols are supposed to have carried >60-200 arrows on their horses with them.) Think about all the fumbles that will occur as well...! I am reminded of one of the old "Murphy's Rules" here:-) Cutting Mistakes - In a 30-minute RuneQuest battle (Chaosium) involving 6000 armored, experienced warriors using Great Axes, more than 150 men will decapitate themselves and another 600 will chop off their own arms or legs... Soren - -- ------------------------------ From: SPerrin@aol.com Date: Fri, 31 Mar 1995 16:25:56 -0500 Subject: Re: Headshots and crits Kevin Rose asks: >If you can reliably and effectively knock someone unconcious with a sap without any chance of killing them, why was this never done for surgery? Why was ether considered a giant breakthough when all they had to do was ask joe the thug to knock out their patients?< While knocking someone unconscious was not possible without a chance of killing them, it was still done. Some "surgeons" had beefy assistants ready with sandbags to knock out patients who moved around too much while their legs were being sawed off. Oh, and someone said something about it being relatively easy to kill someone with the flat of a sword blade when it would be difficult to do so with a sap. Is someone buying into the old 30-pound sword drivel? It would be no easier to kill someone with the flat of a blade than with a sap. On the other hand, either one can be used to knock someone out. All the discussion of the frequency of crits and fumbles (including the infamous Murphy's Rules citation) makes me think more and more that these should be featured as optional rules. And perhaps while we are toning down criticals, some thought should be given to the fumble table, too. Perhaps it should be limited to Drop Weapon, Disoriented for One Round, Hit Friend, Trip, etc. Hit Self seems less and less likely. Certainly I never did so on the field except as a comedy bit. Steve Perrin ------------------------------ From: SPerrin@aol.com Date: Fri, 31 Mar 1995 16:26:05 -0500 Subject: Re: ?!# Sorcery Rules. Greg Walsh accuses me of having something to do with the Presence rules. Is this another instance of Sandy Peterson being mistaken for Steve Perrin? Same initials, different people. I've seen the Vessel writeups, liked them well enough, and have intentions of using aspects of them for my Celtic Faerie campaign, but I didn't write either them or their progenitor. And, as I'm just about to try a sorcerer in a campaign myself, with very different sorcery rules, I'm afraid I don't have any advice for you. Steve (Sandy's the one who shaved his head) Perrin ------------------------------ From: jacobus@sonata.cc.purdue.edu (Bryan J. Maloney) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 95 17:21:12 -0500 Subject: Hitting yourself 'Twas at the Midrealm Summer Crown That word went up and word went down That Corwyn Dragonstar would fight To win the crown with skill and might. I forget the rest, but the gist is that Corwyn managed to score a "lethal" blow to his own head at this tourney. The method involved TWO of what RQ would call "fumbles". Corwin began what is called a "wrap shot" at his opponent, the somewhat short Tonk a-Toi (yes, Laurel passed it, and yes, it can be documented as period). Tonk was charging Corwyn at the time, and he tripped. (Tonk claims to this day that he was actually ducking.) Corwyn's wrap shot was to Tonk's head and had been delivered with a bit too much force to control it. Without Tonk's head to stop the blade, the sword completed a circle and smacked Corwyn a resounding blow to his own head. This is how Tonk a-Toi was ruled the victor of the Midrealm Summer Crown Tourney that year. Corwyn is still embarassed over the event, but he takes it in better humor than he used to. (I happen to know both participants.) I have never heard of this happening at any other SCA tourney, so the "self-kill" might be a possible event, but I would say that it's pretty damned rare, definitely rarer than 00.01% of every blow thrown. ------------------------------ From: ANDOVER@delphi.com Date: Fri, 31 Mar 1995 17:53:31 -0500 (EST) Subject: Criticals Steve Perrin, please keep criticals! Will one of these anti-critical players please explain to me how one avoids the invulnerable tank phenomenon without them? And despite all the talk about dragons, a real Dragon or the Crimson Bat is still invulnerable to any number of crits! As far as I can see, the anti-crit players WANT to have players strolling around invulnerable! If they want that, let them play AD& D! I THOUGHT the POINT of RQ was that you can die! And ie at the hands of anyone! And re those predators, the vast majority of animals in the wild DON'T live very long, because they get hurt all sorts of ways! Jim Chapin ------------------------------ From: "Styopa" Date: Fri, 31 Mar 95 21:29:05 CST Subject: Re: Death and disability. On Fri, 31 Mar 95 15:25:43 BST, yfcw29@castle.ed.ac.uk wrote: >Graeme Lindsell says : > >>I still thinks it's easier to kill someone than to knock >>them out, or to disable them without damage, and that Steve's original >>suggestion was way too gross. > >Have you ever seen casualty statistics for different types of combat? Even >for firefights, nonlethal incapacitation is far more common that death. I have (Singer & Small, "The Wages of War, 1816-1965, A statistical Handbook, as well as extensive studies by Sorokin and Wright) and they pretty clearly indicate a couple of things: 1) in the modern era, hydrostatic shock from a single bullet kills most victims, and those it doesn't kill, it incapacitates. 2) in the pre-gun era, most casualties by far were caused by infections, bleeding, and other post-battle causes 3) even in the Napoleonic era hand to hand combat was remarkable for the LACK of deaths. One would think that throwing thousands of men into hand-to hand combat might lead to ferocious slaughter. sometimes it did,, but usually all were amazed afterward at how FEW actually were killed in melee. So, taking #2 out of the picture (because of magic), I suggest that RQ combat is pretty realistic - melees were not lethal things, and few people went down that weren't outright killed. More likely, people just got cut up and bashed and bonked until they were no longer willing to take it, and fled. I do think that RQ-PCs tend to lose limbs too quickly, tho. - -Steve ------------------------------ End of RQ Rules Digest: V1 #175 ******************************* 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