hanataka

It should be ”Tie: A tie (where both participants achieve the same type of success and roll the same number) means ..."

It's another RQ2/RQ3 glitch, I think. On RQ2 rules, engaged characters can not cast a spell and melee attack in the same round. On RQ3 rules, they can do it. RQG combat rules are based on RQ2 mostly (includes p.195), but some rules ignore this and are written on RQ3 contexts.

p.390 Learning New Spells、 third paragraph the sorcerer has learned the spell and has a beginning percentage in the spell of 1D6 plus the Magic skills category bonus.

I found an inconsistency in the rules of Sprit Magic strike rank. p.193: Strike Rank Modifiers Magic Points Each magic point used +1 Spirit Magic Each +1 boosting +1 p.194: Magic Points Used: Multi-point spells take a finite amount of time to gather the energy for a casting. p.194: Magical Attacks and Strike Ranks To determine the strike rank for spirit magic and sorcery spells, add the strike rank modifier for the magic points used in the spell to the adventurer’s DEX strike rank modifier. Remember that the first magic point used in the spell has no strike rank modifier. p.254: Spell Strike Rank To determine the strike rank at which a spell can be cast, total the adventurer’s DEX strike rank plus the magic points of the spell, plus any boosting magic points. The sum equals the strike rank of the spell. DEX strike rank + magic points of spell + boosting magic points = spell’s strike rank Two rules on page 194 indicate that the first magic point do not be added to the strike rank. It's same as RQ2. Rules on page 193 and 254 seem to indicate all magic point of spell should be add to the strike rank. It's same as RQ3. Which one is correct? Should we rewrite the latter as "magic point of spell (except the first point)" ?

Thank you, PhilHibbs. I have fixed it.

Hi, David. If the ability result table is replaced by another one (like this extended RQ2 table), you have also no problem, don't you? Ability Critical Special Success Failure Fumble ------- -------- ------- ------- ------- ------ 01-04 01 -- 02-05 06-95 96-00 05-09 01 -- Ability Avility 96-00 10-14 01 02 Ability Avility 96-00 15-19 01 02-03 Ability Avility 96-00 20-24 01 02-04 Ability Avility 97-00 25-29 01 02-05 Ability Avility 97-00 30-34 01 02-06 Ability Avility 97-00 35-39 01 03-07 Ability Avility 97-00 40-44 01-02 03-08 Ability Avility 98-00 45-49 01-02 03-09 Ability Avility 98-00 50-54 01-02 03-10 Ability Avility 98-00 55-59 01-02 03-11 Ability Avility 98-00 60-64 01-03 04-12 Ability Avility 99-00 65-69 01-03 04-13 Ability Avility 99-00 70-74 01-03 04-14 Ability Avility 99-00 75-79 01-03 04-15 Ability Avility 99-00 80-84 01-04 05-16 Ability Avility 00 85-89 01-04 05-17 Ability Avility 00 90-94 01-04 05-18 Ability Avility 00 95-99 01-04 05-19 20-95 96-99 00 100-104 01-05 06-20 21-95 96-99 00 105-109 01-05 06-21 22-95 96-99 00 110-114 01-05 06-22 23-95 96-99 00 115-119 01-05 06-23 24-95 96-99 00 120-124 01-06 07-24 25-95 96-99 00

I am reading RuneQuest: Roleplaying in Glorantha. It is most beautiful and exciting rulebook I have ever read. But There are some glitches left in it. As one of them, There are three inconsistency rules in the probability of critical and special success. Rule 1: Page 7."Whenever a division result creates a fraction, always round in favor of the players" If an adventurer has 65% skill, 65/20 = 3.25, he has 4% (rounding upward) chance of critical success. If the enemy has 65% skill, he has 3% chance (rounding downward). If they have 75% skill, 75/20 = 3.75, the result is same. Adventurers have 4%, the enemies have 3% Rule 2: Page 142. "A critical success is an ability roll of 5% (1/20) or less of the modified chance of success." Applying this rule strictly, it becomes as follows. If an adventurer has 65% skill, 65/20 = 3.25, Rolling 03 is less than 3.25% and critical success. 04 is not. If the adventurer has 75% skill, 75/20 = 3.75, Also, a 03 is a critical success. 04 is not. So this is the same as RQ2 and "always rounding downward". Rule 3: Page 143. Ability Result Table Ability Critical Special 63-67 1-3 1-13 68-69 1-3 1-14 70 1-4 1-14 71-72 1-4 1-14 73-77 1-4 1-15 This table is the same as that of RQ3. It is calculated by the following rule. "All fractions less than .5 are dropped; fractions .5 or greater are rounded to the next highest whole number" (RQ3 Player Book p.33) These are only small differences, but I feel the need for the fix. As my personal opinion, Rule 2 is the most simple and best. At first glance, the calculation seems complicated, but actually, Rule 2 is not. When you roll 03, 03 x 20 = 60, the adventurer needs 60% skill or higher for critical success. When you roll 07, 07 x 20 = 140, the adventurer needs 140% skill or higher for critical success. It is very simple. Multiplication is always easier than division. How do you think?

@Paid a bod yn dwp There are inconsistencies in RQ GenCon Preview. It looks to me as if there were two different rules. The one is a main text, and the other is "Summary of Combat Actions" Box. the rules of main texts are similar to that of Quickstart. the Summary is same as the rules that @Jason Durall posted. However, some rules (i.e. Successful Parry vs. Unsuccessful Attack) are only written in the main text, and others (i.e. a special parry vs. normal attack) only existed in the Summary. And the rules which ban using weapons to attack and parry in the same strike rank are written in both and are emphasized by the bold face.

The following example is written in GenCon Preview. I do not mind that weapons will break. It is one of the fun of RQ. However, I feel that breaking a lot is damaging playability.

For #2, a bit more detailed explanation may be necessary. As a simple example, let us consider Broadsword Attack vs. Broadsword Parry. In RQ2, a broadsword has 1D8+1 damage, and a typical warrior has 1D4 damage bonus, the damage is 8 on average. Broadsword has 20 hit points. So on average, the attacking weapon that is failing and parried will break on the third time. In RQG GenCon Preview, the Broadsword damage is same (1D8+1+1D4, average 8 points), But the weapon has only 12 hit points, so it will break on the second time. In test play, I realized that weapons are more fragile than RQ2.

Hi, RuneQuest lovers and developers. I have some question and suggestion about Combat rules of new RuneQuest. I heard that only 100 copies of RQG Preview are distributed, so it might be too early to start the discussion. However we have tried the new combat rules, so I write this before I forget. --- #1 Critical parry vs Critical attack There are two different rules for critical vs. critical. In page 139, "Critical Parries" : If a critical parry is rolled against a critical hit, the parry is treated as a normal parry and the critical hit is treated as a normal attack. In page 140, "SUMMARY OF COMBAT ACTIONS" : - A critical parry vs. a critical attack avoids all damage altogether. Which should be true? --- #2 Successful Parry vs. Unsuccessful Attack Damage to weapons that failed attacks is too powerful. In page 139 "Successful Parry vs. Unsuccessful Attack" A successful weapon parry against an unsuccessful attack always damages the attacking weapon, doing the regular weapon amage no matter how successful the parry. This is actually the same rule as RQ2. But It brings more weapon breaking than RQ2, because new RuneQuest weapons have much smaller Hit Point than RQ2. And it does not seem to be balanced with the following rules. In page 140, "SUMMARY OF COMBAT ACTIONS" : - A special parry vs. a normal attack allows the defender to roll the parrying weapon/shield’s normal damage and compare it to the attacking weapon's hit points. If the damage done from the parry exceeds the attacking weapon's hit points, it takes 1 hit point of damage. - A critical parry versus a normal or special attack will apply the parrying weapon/shield's normal damage directly to the attacker’s weapon. Do not you think the effect of normal parry vs. failed attack should be more mild? --- #3 Same Strike Rule Same strike rank rule is bad rule. In page 139, "Subsequent Parries" : An adventurer may not attack and parry at the same strike rank, or parry more than once at a the same strike rank. A similar rule also existed in "RQ3 with errata". Through playing the game we experienced this to be an inappropriate rule. As a basic concept, combat of RuneQuest (at least RQ2 and 3) is based on Melee Round. Each character performs multiple blows and parries in the whole round, It does not do a single blow on the strike rank. Strike Rank only define the order of Rolls based on the advantages, not timing. For example, you and your opponent have same strike rank weapons, and your opponent has a bit higher DEX. If both characters try to attack and parry with one weapon, the opponent's attack is rolled first, you parry it. What will happen to your attack? Is it delayed to next strike rank? Is it forcibly canceled? If it is only delayed, there are no changes in order and the rule only introduces unnecessary complexity. If it will be canceled, can you declare in advance deliberately delay the attack? It is same order and unnecessary complexity too. If it cannot delay, why can not he do the same with lower DEX characters? If we need a penalty to use the same weapon, we should consider another way: Suggestion 1: Rule like this "If you use the same weapon for attacking and parrying in the same melee round, add +1 to your attacking strike rank." This is very simple and clear. Suggestion 2: Or another, "If you use the same weapon for attacking and parrying, You must subtract -20% from later using skill." This not so simple, but well aligned with the new multiple parry rule. --- #4 Shield advantage My players notice that shields are relatively useless. Parrying by swords is more effective. In old time, Shield would not break, and Parry skill was separated from Attack. But the new rule integrated them. So many characters haves a higher skill rating for sword parry than shield parry, and new shields will break. For example, Broadsword and Medium Shield are same HP (12), and Broadsword has a higher capacity to damage an opponent's weapon. In many situations players chose to parry by their sword, and did not use the shield. The essential advantages of shields were that it is easy to learn, and never broken. But these benefit has been lost by the integration of skills and rules. I think that shields should have distinct advantages in melee combat, besides against missiles. --- #5 Strike Rank Zero Problem When is the actions of SR 0 solved? This is not a new one, but the traditional problem of RQ2. A melee round consists of 12 strike ranks (from 1 to 12). But some very quick(DEX 19+) and large(SIZ 22+) character with a long weapon (2+ meters) attacks at SR 0. In the same way, quick(DEX 19+) character casts 1 magic points spell at SR 0. This is somewhat ambiguous. What is SR 0, is it before Rune Spells (which occur always SR 1)? Suggestion: I wish to have a solution to this problem at the opportunity to create new rule. i.e "If the calculated SR is zero or lower, it is treated as SR 1 of his DEX." or something. --- #6 Adjacent hit location In page 140, "SUMMARY OF COMBAT ACTIONS" : If damage exceeds parrying weapon/shield's hit points, excess damage always goes to an adjacent hit location on the defender What does "adjacent" mean in this context? This word is only in summary, and no explanation. Does this mean the arms holding the weapon? If so, it might be real for parrying by dagger, but in the case of parrying by two-handed long spear it is unlikely. The reflected and weakened blade could land on a random location in target's body, more likely. I feel "adjacent" is not necessary. --- Thank you for reading a long article.

I found errors in SIZ table (page 34 and 105) of new RuneQuest GenCon Preview. This is a very minor error, most people might not care about it. New RuneQuest SIZ table is based on RQ3 (not RQ2). It is mathematically well-formed. Kg = 50 * exp(2, (SIZ - 8)/8) (if SIZ is 8 or greater) But the new one has calculation error. Preview RQ3(should) 16 100-108 17 109-120 109-118 18 121-129 119-129 19 130-142 130-140 20 143-155 141-153 21 156-168 154-167 22 169-184 168-182 23 185-201 183-199 24 202-219 200-217 25 218-237 I noticed this because SIZ 24 and SIZ 25 include same range.

Jeff, Thank you for your reply. I still do not understand God Learner's work. When you meet them next time, Ask them if Yelm should have two Fire rune (like Orlanth and Ernalda).

I have fortunately got a RuneQuest GenCon 50 Preview, thanks to my friend. So there are some questions about the new RuneQuest. The first thing I was concerned about is the Runes of the gods. The gods in the new RuneQuest have a different Runes than the Guide of Glorantha. For example Yelm has Life, Fire, Death (same as RQ3), but in the Guide he has Stasis, Fire, Mastery. Which of the following is the correct understanding of this? Gods' rune changed again. (or the descriptions of the Guide were canceled). It is the Yu-Kargzant Rune, which is not same as the Emperor. It is only RuneQuest rule for Rune magic and backward compatibility (and not the very nature of Glorantha). It does not have to be the same. Official Glorantha Will Vary. Something other? Does Eurmal have Movement rune? How about Issaries's Communication Rune? and so on.

This is a group photo at the event. I am also surprised that many RuneQuest fans gathered.

Thank you, Jeff. I was relieved to hear that. "MOV is usually considered to be 1 meter in combat," on QS page 8. This is a mistake or typo, the correct rule is "3 meters in comabt", isn't it?

I am very confused about the movement rules. In old RQ2, Movement rule is very clear. MOV unit is always 3 meters (10 feet) in combat round, and Human has move 8. If you are not engaged in MELEE combat: You can move up to 24 meters if you move only. You can move up to (half) 12 meters if you use combat action. (Delay 1 SR every 3 meters of movement). If you are engaged in MELEE combat: You can not move. Is it changed? why? In RQG term, what do you meen non-comabat movement and "engage in combat"?