Jump to content

trystero

Members
  • Content Count

    290
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by trystero

  1. I use the Major Wound rules for humans (cultists, etc.) and other real-world creatures, and tend to ignore them for otherworldly horrors.
  2. trystero

    Pronunciation

    Hard "g", "ener" as in "energy", "tela" like "tailor" without the final "r". Gehn-uhr-TAY-luh.
  3. trystero

    Pronunciation

    "Orlanthi": last syllable rhymes with "bee". "Pavis": first syllable rhymes with "pay", though it doesn't sound wrong if that syllable instead rhymes with "bah".
  4. trystero

    Pronunciation

    WĪ-tər (homophone for English adjective "whiter", rhymes with "brighter" and "lighter") TARSH-īte (rhymes with "marsh-bite") SAR-tər-īte (rhymes with "tar-fur-bite") I'm American and rhotic, and so pronounce all four of the "r" letters, where non-rhotic English speakers would, I believe, only pronounce the second "r" in "Sartarite".
  5. I agree. Once the investigator enters play their skill levels are set and no longer tied to their characteristic scores.
  6. Some suggestions: Terms, fourth bullet: "dur" -> "due" Limbs, point A: "cumulated" -> "accumulated" or "cumulative" (?) Limbs, point B: should "cannot exceed the LHP" be "cannot exceed twice the LHP"? Limbs, point 😧 this might be better placed as the first point in this section to make the order of operations clearer. First you check to see whether the damage meets the 3×LHP threshold for maiming or severing, then you cap damage at the 2×LHP threshold before applying it to LHP and THP. Example 3, point 1: "will reduce it to below –4 LHP" -> "will not reduce it to below –4 LHP" (?) Example 5: the numbering of the points should start at 1.
  7. I do wish that RQG was a bit more like 7th-edition CoC, myself. I'd love to see "fight back" as a third defense option (in addition to "dodge" and "parry"), and would similarly love to have percentile characteristics that can be directly opposed to each other or to skills, ditching the Resistance Table. That said, they're not so different; you can definitely blend the bits you like in each game. It's just a bit more work.
  8. …and, in my CoC experience, because you can carry two of them, sawn-off and loaded with slugs, and use them to apply a simple test when any sort of Thing menaces you: Step 1. Empty all four shotgun barrels into the Thing, preferably at point-blank range. Step 2. If it's still moving, you can't kill it; run away.
  9. It's so cute! Lovely that we finally got cthulhu into something's scientific nomenclature.
  10. Stokes wrote Lover in the Ice, which I encountered in its Delta Green adaptation. It's inventive and brilliant and quite uncomfortable to read (if sexual assault is a trigger for you, steer well clear). It's one of those "I want to run this for my group… but also, I don't want to run this for my group" scenarios. I may have to check out No Security based on that and your recommendation. Odd that there's no PDF option for the full book. For those who don't want to search, the five individual PWYW scenarios that Jakob mentions are: Bryson Springs The Fall Without End The Red Tower Revelations The Wives of March
  11. So we have three conflicting explanations of how disease spirits operate: Core rulebook p. 370, Possession section: "When a spirit reduces a corporeal entity’s magic points to 0, the spirit may possess the entity", and then in the bulleted list, "Covert Possession: The possessing creature exerts no influence upon the actions or consciousness of the natural owner of the body, but shares the physical form. Examples include disease spirits…". To inflict a disease on the victim, the disease spirit must reduce the victim's MP to 0 through Spirit Combat Once the victim is diseased, the disease spirit remains in covert possession of the victim until exorcised or until the victim's death This is somewhat similar to the version from RQ3's Creatures Book, p. 35, albeit without the special "MP vs. targeted characteristic" mechanic for spirit combat Glorantha Bestiary p. 166, Disease section: "The first time this spirit succeeds in spirit combat that is not successfully defended against, it infects the victim with the acute version of any disease it carries. For each subsequent success, it infects the victim with another disease or with the next degree version of a previous infection. After the disease spirit has infected its victim with the chronic version of each disease carried, the disease spirit will try to withdraw to infect a new victim." To inflict a disease on the victim, the disease spirit only needs to win one or more Spirit Combat exchanges, rather than reducing the victim all the way to 0 MP The disease spirit does not take possession of the victim Glorantha Bestiary, p. 169, Disease Spirit entry: "…if the disease spirit succeeds in an attack when the victim fails, the spirit can try to infect the target with any of the diseases it is carrying. This infection requires another roll overcoming the target’s Spirit Combat skill, as if the disease spirit was trying to possess the victim. If successful, this does not force the victim’s spirit from the body but infects the victim with the acute form of any disease carried. A second success infects the victim with the next degree of the disease…" To inflict a disease on the victim, the disease spirit needs to win one or more Spirit Combat exchanges and win a secondary opposed Spirit Combat contest for each, rather than reducing the victim all the way to 0 MP The disease spirit presumably does not take possession of the victim This is the version from RQ2's Cults of Terror, p. 31, though in that book the rolls were POW vs. POW contests rather than opposed Spirit Combat contests @Jason Durall, which one is right?
  12. @Tupper, I chose another 2 points intentionally, to illustrate the difference that Jason's answer above makes. Here's my understanding of how my example works, in more detail: Before combat, uninjured: My arm is at 3 HP (its full value), and I'm at full total HP. Life is good. After a 7-point arm hit: My arm takes 7 points of damage and drops to −4 HP (and I'm incapacitated and can take no action beyond healing attempts, because the arm has now taken at least 2× its original HP). But total HP loss from a single arm or leg hit can't exceed 2× the location's HP, which in this case is a 6-HP limit, so my total HP only drop by 6, not by 7. After another 2-point arm hit: My arm takes another 2 points of damage and drops to −6 HP (and is severed or maimed, because it's now taken 3× its original HP). My total HP drop by another 2, so I'm down 8 total HP. So the first hit does 7 points to the arm, but only 6 to your total HP. The second hit does 2 to the arm and 2 to your total HP. Again, this is my understanding; I'm interested to hear whether others see it differently.
  13. So it sounds as though the 2×location HP limit on total HP loss for arm and leg injuries is the only case where it matters whether damage was done by a single attack or multiple attacks. A single attack can't cause total HP loss in excess of this limit, but a later attack can do so. Or, in other words, if I have a 3 HP in my arm location and I'm hit by an attack doing 7 points, I only lose 6 total HP, but if I'm hit again in that arm for 2 more points, I still lose another 2 total HP and my arm is still severed or maimed. Thanks, Jason; it's good to have this matter clarified, even if it's not in the book. I hope the PDF edition can be updated to reflect this ruling.
  14. As much as I think the new layout is pretty, I still miss the plain simplicity of Times body text, Univers and Benguiat headers found in the original and classic CoC releases. Those were readable above all else, and great when skimming.
  15. A proud moment. Well done! Full disclosure: I'm credited as a proofreader in the second edition of Terror Australis. Even fuller disclosure: The NLA didn't request a copy because of my proofreading.
  16. Book of Battles has maneuver rolls, sample foes (you typically fight one round with a given foe, rather than to the death), and abstract measurement of how much the PCs are in the thick of things expressed as their "Rank" (first rank is the killing zone, second rank is behind that, etc.). It measures your overall progress on an Intensity scale, where 0 means decisive victory and 40 means decisive defeat; commanders oppose Intensity with their Battle skill, and lots of events affect it. And there are forms for the GM, any leaders, and other PCs to keep records on what happens every round. As this indicates, the system is surprisingly "crunchy" where the original Pendragon rules are not; good if that's your thing, though they're very tightly focused on Arthurian knightly battles and would likely need some adaptation to handle the wilder, weirder Hero Wars. L5R 5th edition's mass-battle system is more abstracted but structurally similar: the two army commanders set their strategic objectives for each round of battle (like "capture a position" or "grind the enemy down"), and leaders of cohorts in their armies take actions (like Assault, Reinforce, or Rally) to try to achieve it. You get rewards for achieving the objective. Armies are rated for Strength (which is reduced by attrition in the form of casualties) and Discipline (which is reduced by panic), and can have special abilities, like cavalry inflicting extra panic if they take the Assault action. PCs are typically expected to command armies or lead cohorts (any subsection of an army which acts on its own, from a squad on up); in a round, a leader can choose a stance (tactic), narratively move their cohort on the field, and perform an action. Fortifications and defensive terrain reduce attrition for forces in them, and have a measure of how hard it is to push those forces out. The one downside is that it doesn't really provide much structure for PCs who aren't leaders or commanders. L5R 4th edition (the only other one I have) has simpler rules that focus more on roaming PC heroes and less on the details of the battle itself — the army commanders make opposed Battle skill rolls to see who's winning, then each PC makes a check to see how much Glory they win, how many Wounds they suffer, and whether or not they have the opportunity for a Duel (a one-on-one fight with a foe using the normal melee rules) or a Heroic Opportunity (a chance to change the course of the battle at some risk, such as getting a shot at an enemy commander or having the opportunity to fall upon the enemy's reserves before they can be committed to the fray). I think I'd mix bits of the L5R 4th- and 5th-edition rules to get about the level of abstraction I like. I want a system that tells me which army will win if the PCs don't do anything to affect the outcome (and how it'll win) and that takes the opposing leaders' tactics and forces into account, but that doesn't get bogged down in detail. And I think I prefer the Duel/Heroic Opportunity idea to the Pendragon approach where you and a foe always each take one swing at each other and are then swept apart; it seems a bit more flexible. YMMV, obviously.
  17. My preference is to have a simple resolution system that takes the armies' sizes and positions, opposing leaders' Battle skills and chosen tactics, and a few other factors into account, and then allows for significant PC actions to tip the balance. I suppose you could steal the Battle rules from Pendragon (either the simpler ones in the core book or the much-more-complicated system from Book of Battle). I'd also suggest checking out Legend of the Five Rings (almost any edition) for a good set of rules that give PCs some heroic things to do without requiring you or the players to run a wargame-like experience, and GURPS Mass Combat for a somewhat crunchier system which would require conversion but which does almost everything I want a mass-battle system to do for me. It's possible that Chaosium will publish rules for battles in a later RQG supplement, of course; these are the Hero Wars…
  18. trystero

    Movement Rate

    I like the 7th-edition Call of Cthulhu movement-rate rules; everyone starts with base MOV 8 (sound familiar?), and you get +1 if your SIZ is the lowest of STR/SIZ/DEX or –1 if it's the highest of the three. And you also lose 1 MOV for each full decade above 30 (so –1 at 40–49, –2 at 50–59, etc.). It's not super-crunchy, but it does mean that different investigators have different movement rates… which is a big thing in a game where you often just need to outrun your fellow PCs. :-) I'd probably use the same +1/–1 adjustments in RuneQuest, at least as a starting point.
  19. Maybe. For myself, I read "hit for three times as much damage as the adventurer has hit points in that location" as meaning instant death only occurs if a single hit does that much damage, but it's definitely open to interpretation. If it's cumulative, why have the thrice-the-location-HP entries at all? That would be superfluous.
  20. I don't think the rule is superfluous. Someone with 10 HP who takes 6 points of damage to the head followed by another 6 points to the same location dies at the end of the current round because their total HP are 0 or less, per pp. 146–147, but if the same person takes 12 points (3× location HP) in a single strike to the head, they die instantly, as per p. 148. It may not be a huge distinction, but it's the difference between "maybe someone can heal me before I expire" and "well, I hope someone has Resurrection".
  21. It's not helpful that the examples for twice-location-HP and thrice-location-HP both show the effect of a single hit. I think you might be right about twice-location-HP: the condition is "If the head, chest, or abdomen suffers more than twice as much damage as the adventurer has hit points in that location", with no comment on the number of hits required. But the thrice-location-HP instant-death special-effect condition is "A head, chest, or abdomen hit for three times as much damage as the adventurer has hit points in that location", which to me suggests a single hit for that much damage, not just the location damage cumulatively reaching that threshold. I do wish this was all clearer; the book has been out for months, we're up to a corrected PDF version, we have Q&A access to the design team… and I still can't tell what the intent of the rules are on several key points of combat. I don't want RQ to read like Pathfinder or a case-system wargame, but I do wish it had been gone over prior to release by someone who valued consistency of terminology and more illustrative examples. After RQ3, the combat system of which I thought was a paragon of clear writing (though not without errors), this edition feels like something of a retrograde step to me.
  22. Here's my summary of how I think damage effects actually work by hit location. Interested to see whether this is how everyone else parses the rules. Damage < Location HP All Hit Locations: No effect beyond total HP loss. Damage >= Location HP Arm: Arm is unusable; adventurer drops anything held with it. Leg: Leg is unusable; adventurer falls prone, takes no action this round. May fight from prone position in following rounds. Abdomen: Both legs are unusable, adventurer falls prone and takes no action this round. May fight from prone position in following rounds. Adventurer bleeds to death in 10 minutes unless abdomen is treated or healed. Chest: Adventurer falls prone, can take no actions, bleeds to death in 10 minutes unless chest is treated or healed. Head: Adventurer is unconscious, dies in 5 minutes unless head is treated or healed. Damage >= 2 × Location HP Arm or Leg: If limb suffered 2 × location-HP damage or more from a single hit, ignore total HP loss in excess of 2 × location HP; adventurer is incapacitated and can take no action beyond healing attempts. Otherwise, no further effect. Abdomen, Chest, or Head: If location suffered 2 × location-HP damage or more from a single hit, adventurer is unconscious, bleeds 1 HP/round until location is treated or healed. Otherwise, no further effect. Damage >= 3 × Location HP Arm or Leg: If limb suffered 3 × location-HP damage or more from a single hit, ignore total HP loss in excess of 2 × location HP; limb is severed or maimed, adventurer is incapacitated and can take no action beyond healing attempts. Otherwise, no further effect. Abdomen, Chest, or Head: If location suffered 3 × location-HP damage or more from a single hit, adventurer dies instantly. Otherwise, no further effect.
  23. I wouldn't; I think that would go beyond the limits of fair use. But let's hope the Classic Edition version is out soon...
  24. By the 7th-edition rules, armour's effectiveness is not reduced no matter how many times it's penetrated or struck.
  25. The suggestion of augmenting comes from the RQG rules: "The Move Quietly skill may be used to augment the Hide skill, and vice versa." (p. 189, Hide skill description) Seems counter-intuitive to me, too.
×
×
  • Create New...