From:      owner-rq-rules-digest
To:        rq-rules-digest@hops.wharton.upenn.edu
Subject:   RQ Rules Digest: V1 #181
Reply-To:  rq-rules
Errors-To: owner-rq-rules-digest
Precedence: bulk
Content-Return: Prohibited
Return-Path: owner-rq-rules-digest


RQ Rules Digest:          Wednesday, 5 April 1995      Volume 01 : Number 181


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

Photography AVC               Serious injuries in SCA c...
Loren Miller                  Runelore, cool it!
Colin Watson                  Criticals
Hugh Foster                   Characters and hitself
SPerrin@aol.com               What's the SCA?
Colin Watson                  Serious injuries in SCA combat
Bryan J. Maloney              Armor and clutter
ANDOVER@delphi.com            Conan and the magicians
Aden Steinke                  Archers

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Photography AVC" <NAVCP%helios%seascale@newcastle.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 11:40:14 GMT0BST
Subject: Re: Serious injuries in SCA c...

> Oh well, this is starting to sound like an SCA list instead of a RQ list.
> 
> Steve Perrin

Without trying to sound to green,  What exactly is SCA?
 it sounds like somekind of free for all, lets kick the shit out
of some other guys, and injure them quite badly. Sounds like
Good healthy sport to me. Will it be in the Olympics soon.(HoHO)
No seriously, is it like LAFRP(Live Action Fantasy Roleplay)

Sean

------------------------------

From: Loren Miller <loren@hops.wharton.upenn.edu>
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 11:13:19 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Runelore, cool it!

mdouglas_at_AIGWHQ@mailhost.aig.com writes:
<a table of contents and a bunch of ill-formatted, unreadable text>

to which SPerrin@aol.com replies:
> Mike,
> 
> So far, we've gotten your Table of Contents and your Introduction. Is
> anything else coming?

Good question.  I've twice asked Mike to send his material directly to
me so I can attempt to fix the formatting for distribution on the
mailing list but he hasn't done so yet.  Everybody, please encourage
Mike to get his materials to someone (who doesn't have to be me) who
will fix the formatting for email distribution.

- -- 
+++++++++++++++++++++++23
Loren Miller       <loren@hops.wharton.upenn.edu>
"I don't have to practice what I preach 'cause I'm not the kind of
person I'm preaching to!"                The Book of The Subgenius

------------------------------

From: Colin Watson <watson@csd.abdn.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 17:02:05 +0100
Subject: Re: Criticals

__________
David Cake defends criticals:
> It is not at all uncommon for my PCs to be able to take more damage than
> they are capable of inflicting (without crits and specials). Protection 4,
> chain or plate, and a broadsword and no damage bonus, and a few points of
> bladesharp.

This surprises me. I find that RQ characters tend to be able to dish-out
more damage than they can take. Chainmail and plate armour are too
costly to be worn on more than a couple of locations usually. Even if you can
afford the cash it's heavy on the ENC.  It's always cheaper to buy a big weapon
than a good suit of armour. (And surely anyone be-decked in chainmail
is going to have a damage bonus?)

I'd have said a more "typical" character would be wearing mostly ringmail
with bits of lamellar or scale over padding, wielding a bastard sword rather
than a broadsword, and with a +1d4 damage modifier. (Less subtle chaps would
use a great axe or greatsword.)

Somehow, damage spells seem to be more popular/common than protection in the
group I play with. Not to mention Damage Boosting if there's a tame sorcerer in
the bunch.

It just goes to show how play varies between groups. The winning PC strategy
seems to be to chainsaw opponents with as much damage a possible so they
don't get a *chance* to critical you. Sad, but true. Crits make heavy armour
a waste of time. Hit first and hit hard, it's the only way.

>         It means my Wind Lord PC is doomed to be an almost irrelevancy in
> HTH. He is a sword master, but he is not that big, and he doesn't have
> Truesword (and probably will never get it), and is unlikely to get a really
> big Bladesharp. At least now his occasional lucky roll gets through armour,
> and he can generally hold off an opponent until then. Without criticals, he
> is doomed to be an irrelevancy in HTH combat  You tell him :-)

Ok. Of course he's redundant. Anyone in a situation where they have to roll a
CRIT when the other guys just have to roll a HIT is redundant. The chance
of a crit might as well be no chance at all.

And if *both* sides need to roll crits it just gets silly: in a clash between
two rune-levels with 95%+ skills they each have 5% or so chance to crit.
Multiply this by the 5% chance that the other guy will fail his parry at the
same time and your looking at 400 hits before a sudden death-blow occurs.
It's a mad lottery.

> Almost everyone has access to Shield or good armour, but only a few cults get
> good weapon enhancing magic.

In the main non-Gloranthan campaign that I play in, True Weapon is probably
a marginally more common cult-magic than Shield. And given the choice between
sacking a point of POW for True Weapon or a point of POW for Shield 1
you can guess which is most popular among initiates. Shield means you might
last a little longer before you get critted - True Weapon means you finish the
fight before it's begun.


>        Armour is overpowered in RQ compared to damage.

I disagree. I'd say in most circumstances they are resonably balanced.
Normal weapons can get through normal armour; heavy weapons can get through
heavy armour; 1 point of True Weapon can get through several points of
Shield.

The ultimate limit to this seems to be that Shield is stackable whereas
there a relative absence of stackable weapon-enhancing divine magic.
The solution is left as an exercise...


> There are several counters to this built into the system to stop it being
> a big problem. Criticals are one of the best of such counters, because

Criticals are the craziest, wackiest, most random way of solving this problem
that I can think of. "Armour is too good: so we'll give a small but
significant chance that it doesn't give any protection in a given round;
such that, after a couple of dozen rounds of combat, you find that you might
as well not be wearing any armour at all". This is baaaad.

Look, I can understand the "realism argument" where people pointed out
that there's always an outside-chance of a lucky hit. For this reason
I wouldn't mind crits IF they were an order of magnitude less frequent.
But to argue that crits are the solution to a gross armour problem that
*hardly ever arises* in a normal game seems absurd to me.


> >Just as a thought, Jar-ell can kill a few thousand troops in an afternoon,
> >with basically no real chance of something bad happening in Dragon Pass.
> >Should she be critted on the same frequency as PCs?  Why or why not?
> [...]
> Its just the dragon example again - 

And again the question is, "how did she survive long enough to get that way?".

> the point being that if she behaves
> stupidly, and is assumed to be working by exactly the same rules as the
> average warrior, sure she dies. She is Jar-Eel, and does neither, and that
> is why she is a super-hero.

In short, Jar-Eel is not playing RQ3; rather some other system where heroism
is viable.

___
CW.

------------------------------

From: Hugh Foster <100326.446@compuserve.com>
Date: 04 Apr 95 13:24:43 EDT
Subject: Characters and hitself

>>  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 <<

Yes, after all, genes throw dice to roll up an embryo...

>> [Styopa] 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  <<

Thankyew!

>>  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.  <<

While fighting with Jomsvikings [UK Viking reenactors], I 
have observed Osric, our Jarl for lo, these many years, 
winding up for a clip with two weapons (usually swords 
though he's done it with an axe), hit himself on the back 
of the bonce during the backswing with enough force to 
cross his eyes. This happens at least once a season, amid 
much merriment! He's one of the best in the group, BTW, not 
a blind flailer. Based on this and my own tendency to 
occasionally kludge myself under the chin with my pommel on 
drawing, I'd accept the "hit self" fumble - but not the 
"hit self -  impale" or worse fumble.


- -----------------------------------------------------------------
| Hugh Foster [100326,446]                                      |
|                                                               |
| Run it around the block - and see if the wheels fall off.     |
| (Spud, Thick as a Brick MCC)                                  |
- -----------------------------------------------------------------



------------------------------

From: SPerrin@aol.com
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 13:47:02 -0400
Subject: Re: What's the SCA?

Sean at the Photography AVC asked the inevitable question.

"The Middle Ages as they should have been, not as they were."

The Society for Creative Anachronism Inc. is a non-profit,
educational, corporation that attempts to re-create the middle ages in 
various ways. Most germane to this discussion is the broadsword
fighting that takes place in the tournaments that are held in each
region. Each region is a Kingdom and the king of each kingdom is 
chosen in combat at the tournaments.

"Living Better Medievally"

The combat is done in the most authentic and protective armor
possible, with the accent on the protection. In the 27 years the
SCA has been in existence, the armor has gotten more and
more authentic while maintaining safety. People who used to wear
mattress padding hauberks now chug along in full plate.
     Weapons used are swords of all sizes made of rattan (Another of
those accidents in combat was a greenstick fracture of a combatant's
arm during a test of hardwood swords. He had a leather vambrace.)
plus padded axes, maces, etc.
  Three of the original authors of RuneQuest, me, Steve Henderson, and
Warren James, were SCA fighters and our experience provided many of
the strengths and weaknesses of RuneQuest combat rules.

"All the men talk about is Arms and Armor and Fighting."

There are several English branches of the SCA. Unfortunately, they are
all based out of various members' homes and my source doesn't have any
current addresses. Central HQ is here in the USA, as you might expect.

Phone Number (408) 263-9305
Address POBox 360789
            Milpitas, CA 95036

There is an SCA newsgroup, but I've misplaced the address. rec.org.sca? If
that doesn't work, check back with me and in the meantime I'll try to scare
it up.
It can be a lot of fun.

Steve Perrin

PS: BTW Sean, what's Photography AVC?

------------------------------

From: Colin Watson <watson@csd.abdn.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 18:22:31 +0100
Subject: Re: Serious injuries in SCA combat

I must say Steve & Bryan's accounts of SCA combat have been most
enlightening.

________________
Bryan J. Maloney:
> Heat stroke is the most common injury, far outnumbering ANYTHING else.

Methinks a decent system for dealing with fatigue is in order to
reflect the downside of wearing armour.

> You're more prone to hurting yourself by tripping over badly-designed leg
> armor.

Would it seem reasonable to impose attack/defense skill penalties for folks
wearing armour? Is it more difficult targetting/avoiding blows when
your cluttered with all that metal and padding? Which locations cause
most restriction when you armour them?


___
CW.

------------------------------

From: jacobus@sonata.cc.purdue.edu (Bryan J. Maloney)
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 95 14:32:06 -0500
Subject: Armor and clutter

Armor does not interfere with combat movement unless it isn't YOUR
armor.  That's pretty much it.  Actually, even YOUR armor will interfere
with normal combat movement (including swinging a weapon and walking)
if it's badly made.

Armor of "average" quality will offer very little direct interference with
normal movement.  Armor of very high quality, well-fitted to the user,
gives virtually no interference aside from its weight.

However, ill-fitting armor is a NIGHTMARE.  Your knees beat into the
greaves.  Your elbow won't bend all the way.  You can't quite raise
your arm enough at the shoulder.  The waist articulation isn't at your
bend point.  All of that can make fighting dangerous just to move.  However,
I've only encountered these problems when wearing "loaner" armor, not 
something built for me.

Properly made armor is not "off the rack" unless it's cloth or chain.  
Anything with any stiffness has to be fitted to some degree or another.


------------------------------

From: ANDOVER@delphi.com
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 1995 19:46:40 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Conan and the magicians

Aside from the critical issue, there does seem to be a drift towards
the idea that "only magic beats magic."  OK, defenders of Conan, where
are you to be found?  Conan was ALWAYS popping wizards!  With these
proposed rules, Conan is useless without a magician at his side!  And
is magic really TOO WEAK in this game?  Jim Chapin

------------------------------

From: "Aden Steinke" <Aden_Steinke@uow.edu.au>
Date: 5 Apr 1995 10:31:09 +1000
Subject: Archers

Hi all

>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.)

English longbowmen in the 100 years war were reputed to have phenomenal rates
of fire for short periods by readying the arrows in advance, a matter of
taking them and sticking them headfirst in the ground in front of the archer.

Even with hundreds of readied arrows (not a realistic possibility anyway)
there is a limit on this in that it tires the archer to fire rapidly - I
don't know if the current RQ captures this.

Aden

------------------------------

End of RQ Rules Digest: V1 #181
*******************************


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