Jump to content

RosenMcStern

Members
  • Content Count

    2,676
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    29

Everything posted by RosenMcStern

  1. And this is mythe main point: historically, 1H swords sucked against heavily armoured opponents. All re-enactors will tell you that axes, and even more maces, are the 1H weapons of choice to subdue someone wearing armour. Check Lindybeige, Matt Easton or Skallagrim on youtube. Historical research seem to confirm this, as the heaviest forms of these weapons evolved together with armour. So the point is: should the game provide a way to facilitate unrealistic, unhistorical use of a weapon outside of its range of effectiveness because he or she wants to use only a single weapon in all situations? I think not. If your player's character has no Might, then he should not use a sword against heavy armour: he should carry an axe or a mace for this kind of situation. Given that Revolution D100 allows players not to stick to a "main weapon" for all situations, I think the correct solution is encouraging use of a plurality of weapons. Historical fighters certainly did train with many weapons, not just one. When you use Coup de Grace to hit a gap that is not contemplated in the coverage values, small weapons are already at an advantage because you can use the effect only after stunning your opponent, which means that you will probably have few SR left yourself. A dagger might be the only weapon that can strike without a Penalty in that situation. If a gap exists and you can strike it, then weapons of any length should be able to exploit it, provided the blow bypasses parries. The rules are modeled around Pete Nash's statement that he can reliably hit an area 5-10cm wide on his opponent's body. And he does not fight with daggers according to the pictures I have seen him post This subject was tackled on the Glorantha Digest and RQ-Rules digest back in the 90s IIRC. Protection and Shield are not an impenetrable force field, but they can be regarded as something that makes existing armour (including skin) harder. Think of rhino hide: it is tough as hell, but there are weak spots over articulations, where the skin must fold.
  2. The core rules in RD100 already work well for heavily armoured fighters, both in gothic and Renaissance armour. The suggestions you made seem either pointless or counter-productive to me. Weapon-armour interactions work perfectly and provide different outcomes depending on the type of weapon, rather than relying on a generic "ignore" effect. Note also that the concept of Coverage gives you more realistic outcomes in this case, because it differentiates between armour types: chain mail, which is a very popular armour type, offers little protection but it is very easy to clad a fighter completely in it (see Simon's comment in the other thread). Doing the same with plate increases the cost and cumbersomeness of armour dramatically, and very few cultures were able to do this. Muskets: plate cuirasses DID stop bullets. In fact, all Renaissance breastplates came with a dent which the artisan did by firing a bullet at short distance to prove the plate could take hits without being pierced. There is still a chance of piercing a plate, of course, but it is connected to the Impale effect which muskets have, and it is not easy to take down someone so protected. Do not forget that cuirasses were still in use in the 19th Century (and later) to protect charging cavalry from bullets, so giving muskets an anti-armour effect translates to making some armour pieces ineffective in stopping exactly the type of attack they were designed to stop. Cuirasses are ineffective against swords, which can easily target the back of the cuirassier by manoeuvring in melee, not against muskets which cannot strike from your angle of choice. Note that RD100 represents this in a very simple way with the +2 to armour coverage for ranged attacks. The difference you remark between bullet and sword is represented in RD100 not by making armour ineffective, but by applying the three damage effects, Slash, Impale and Crush. A sword is devastating against an unarmoured opponent, as it can easily sever limbs or cut you in two by applying the slash effect. However, this means that armour is doubly effective against swords as the extra damage applies after armour. Spears and bullets, on the other hand, while doing potentially less damage apply their effect before armour, and thus are much more effective against armour. A mere mail shirt will block the average slashing attack completely, while piercing attacks with weapons with the same base damage will go through. In addition to this, you can use the version of the Choose Location that comes with the Conspiracy Theory to represent aiming at weak spots in armour. A good stunt could allow you to gain a -3 to Coverage with your weapon of choice. Of course, the gap needs to be there to strike through it, otherwise you have to use one of the techniques below to open a gap where there is none. Stilettos: RD100 is probably the system that better represents their usefulness in combat without introducing super-complicate rules. If you have one in your left hand, you are almost certain to end the round with at least one attack available when your opponent has 0 readiness, which means you roll at full skill and he defends at -30%. And if you manage to drop his SR to 0 with a Stun with your main weapon, then you can ignore armour with a non-critical roll with Coup de Grace. Terribly deadly, and it corresponds to actual combat techniques used against heavily armoured opponents: stun with a mace, then finish with a smaller pointy weapon through a gap in the armour. Hammers can do both parts of the sequence if you prefer to have one weapon only, and in fact they were known as armour-killers on Renaissance era battlefields. Half-swording/ Rather than just "bypass armour", the half-swording techniques shown in page 1 should give more opportunities to use Coup de Grace, as the technique aims at creating a gap that is normally not there in the armour. I cannot remember whether I put this kind of stunt as a suggestion in a sidebar, but you can make up your own stunt in any case. There are a lot of other interactions that already implement most of the techniques used in armoured combat. It is just that not all rules that influence armour effects have been labelled as "anti-armour". But they are there, do not worry. We have studied and tested the subject intensively.
  3. Quick reply: Shamanism will be in Wind on the Steppes. We do not have a formalised ETA but I have had plenty of discussions with Zit about spirit combat. There will be no "generic" shamanism chapter in the Companion, I prefer having this kind of rules firmly anchored to a cultural context, and you can see that it is easy to extrapolate them for a different one. As for NPC building, we may add some guidelines, but as Lloyd has explained, the process is extremely easy in RD100. You do not need to run through the character creation procedure.
  4. Be careful then, the final exam has a high failure rate. What is left of the failing candidates is in their personal files, in a separate envelope.
  5. While Enchant/Ritual only spells are still possible in Revolution D100, the approach we recommend is the same as that found in 13th Age: you use slots only for spell formats you can cast in combat, the rest is just a ritualized form of this basic magic. So basically a Golem is a construct you make by using the Shape Stone base power. However, which is the difference between a random guy with Shape Stone (not so common a spell in any case) and a wise Rabbi who can create golems? Well, in short it is a blueprint. The kabbalistic ritual to create a golem is nothing but a magic blueprint that the construct maker must use, and that you cannot learn until you also know Shape Stone. The crafting process involves both Craft and Concentration, so a good construct maker should be skilled in both. The result for stone golems is something similar to the statistics found in Merrie England. Toughness should be normal, otherwise the golem would be as resistant as a skeleton. Thank you for bringing this subject forth, folks. It was important to formalise it before we release the new SRD.
  6. Also called the chainmail bikini
  7. The International Edition will be in four languages, including English. It will include some rule polishings and rebalances, the casting rules being one of the more impactful. However, it will mainly be a rewriting of those chapters which are too "wargamey" in style, that is they are precise but rather difficult to understand.
  8. Yes, the casting roll is also the first roll of the Conflict, see p. 112, "Initiating a Parallel Conflict". And Traits are applied normally: the attacker uses the Power trait, and the defender uses WIllpower or the same Power Trait if he knows the spell. An appropriate Motivation can be used to replace a Trait.
  9. Yes, this was a known issue. Let us draw a curtain...
  10. As I said, I *did* take 4d6 damage from firebolts and remained standing
  11. A -1 is more or less the equivalent of the rules as they will appear in the International Edition. You can also enforce the fuelling of the first point of Might and of the default 1 Target, which is what will be in the definitive form of the rules. On average a 7d6 blast of energy will take two Actions, but a lucky roll may allow you to obliterate one enemy with one single Action. OTOH, if you roll low twice...
  12. But I do remember it because he impersonated me, too. I think he is still around and behaves as a gentleman now. These are instead classic examples of how an episode trespassed the limits of acceptability but was handled in a swift and universally accepted way. Everyone agreed with Sverre's actions at the time, and everything was done openly.
  13. Don't worry, it is all playtested and it is not that overpowered.
  14. 1d10-1 (+1~2) per concentration action, as you may roll aa 0 on the tens die. It is potentially deadlier, but on average you will "charge" 5,5 points per Concentration action including INT / WIL bonus. A huge blast of energy will usually require two Actions, or in some cases a decision about whether to unleash a suboptimal spell in one round. And the final rules will contain a micro-nerfing of this rule, requiring a couple more points per casting. So the overall effect is that it is slightly deadlier, but quite unpredictable. As magic should be.
  15. Unfortunately we could not put much "color" in the core book because of space (those two pages of sample deities are really sketchy and it was a pain to squeeze them in), but the science rules let you create both steampunk stuff and "witcher-style" drugs. Smoke grenades should be added as a "freebie" to anyone having the grenade Trait, as they are really easy to make. Unfortunately the rules are in the Quickstart but not in the core, but they are available nevertheless. Edit: I mentioned color because smoke grenades are really appropriate only if your fantasy includes a minimum of steampunk flavour, but IMO a good depiction of dark elves, and moreso of dwarfs, should include some steampunk elements.
  16. Then I suspect Toughness is not for you. Basically, it is an all-or-nothing mechanics: either you overcome location HP (renamed as Toughness) with your damage, or it is just a flesh wound the effects of which you will shrug off almost completely by the end of the round. Light wound effects are non-cumulative if you do not overcome the threshold, and you are entitled to an Endurance roll if Toughness in a vital location is overcome. So it is either one-shot or nothing. On the other hand big and healthy characters are very resilient, as you cannot take them down by attrition: either you deal serious damage or it is basically a no effect. You can find the whole rules in the Revolution D100 SRD, Chapter 4a - Advanced Combat, link in the RD100 forum.
  17. Irem is being worked upon actively, but the author has four other deadlines this week (Lucca Comics is coming) and I do not expect to receive any update soon. ETA is ASAP but not anytime soon. Adventures on the Astral Sea has been cancelled because the author made different choices. Guide to the Galactic Frontier is being released for Savage Worlds first. It may appear later in Revolution D100 format. We have a couple of new one to announce soon - I hope.
  18. Smoke is an essential component of modern warfare. It keeps troops alive and allows them to move undisturbed. You do not see it very often in Hollywood movies* because it would hide the action, but it gets used quite often on real battlefield. It is probably widespread in the Star Wars universe, too, although the directors choose to not show it. There could be no other explanation for the hit rate of storm troopers, otherwise. As for the offensive use of Teleport.... well, once the caster has made so many rolls I see no reason not to reward the creative use of the spell.
  19. On the other hand, if you also use alchemy, teleporting grenades does not require Conflicts, and is also very effective. As is "Teleport venomous snake/spider from its cage".
  20. Hmm, Overcome for unwilling target is not specified, in fact. But it should be a no-brainer: either the teleport target agrees, or a WIL vs WIL conflict starts. And opponents have time to think of countermeasures. Simply hiding the target before the Conflict is over might work. Or not, if the spell is powerful enough to allow a Quick Exit on the first roll - but this would require a very high skill and a very high WIL, so the insta-kill effect is not inappropriate. Creative use of spells is not a bad thing, provided the players are not "gaming it". Bypassing the requirement of a Conflict when you use a spell offensively is "gaming it", in fact.
  21. Well, I think we have to agree to disagree on this subject. My questions were answered in full. My objections also stay in full, but I see no reason to continue the discussion, as this could lead someone to looking for the transcripts of the "episode" on the internet. And believe me, it is not "educational".
  22. Jeff, I know perfectly what that person told to MOB (I read it) and I do not condone it. My question was : 1. How does it reconcile with Triff's statement above about "only spammers". 2. Can people get banned here for what they do elsewhere? Apparently, the answer to question #2 is "yes".
  23. Sheer numbers are already an explanation, Seneschal. Let us assume that the ratio of "people who can act with self restraint" / "people who act idiotically" is 100:1, which is probably true for this esteemed community. This means that with 1000 active members, you have 10 morons who post trash, and 990 reasonable people who refrain from responding. With 10,000 members, you have 100 morons and a whopping 9,900 decent human beings. Now the principle of the growing forest making way less noise than a single falling tree kicks in: 9,900 people who behave "excellently" make the exact same noise as when they were 990, but 100 idiots create much more trouble than 10.
  24. This answer is fully acceptable. However, I have two more questions, because something does not add up too well in my mind. First. The moderation took action against one post in this very thread. Due action, in my opinion. However, in order to learn that one inacceptable comment has been rightfully sanctioned, one must have a look at other sites, where the offender started a classic cross-forum drama - and got sanctioned again, btw. In what way is this secrecy useful to the well being of our community? Particularly when the details that are kept behind closed doors here end up in the public domain elsewhere? Second question: Trif, you stated that only spammers have been banned, plus one member received a temporary ban - I suppose the guy whom I am referring to above. However, how does this reconcile with MOB's statement in this post: https://basicroleplaying.org/topic/7685-four-features-that-help-make-runequest distinct-among-other-roleplaying-games/?tab=comments#comment-107845 that one particular "keyboard warrior" had been preemptively and permanently banned from this community? Because that specific case was certainly not about spamming. Incivil behaviour yes, but not spamming. Also, am i wrong in thinking that "preemptive" means that the person has been banned for something he has done on another board?
  25. Hey, the two of you! You are off topic, bring this to the appropriate forum. Jokes aside, this is something that I do not recommend, not that I do not approve The reason is that doing so has the effect of focusing the evolution of the character on one thing only, that is the %age of success. You use two or three levels of improvement on just improving your chance of doing something, without any special focused on one aspect of that "something". Example: Kurchack the Mongol has 40% Ranged Combat. He takes the Javelin and Bow traits, but obviously wants to specialize in the classic Nomad Bow. If we use different levels of specialisation, he will acquire "Javelin" and "Bow" to use them at 50%, and then "Composite Bow" and "Nomad Bow" or "Horse Archery" to reach 70% with his Mongol bow. This makes his skills with these weapons different, but only in the % of success. If we focus on Stunts instead, he can acquire Javelin and Bow and become proficient in both at 70%, then he can acquire "Fast Reload" to improve his rate of fire - which is better than improving the skill because he shoots two arrows instead of one in the same time - and "Horse Archery" to fire from a galloping mount. Yes, skills have all the same value, but there are many more details that the game is handling.
×
×
  • Create New...