Jump to content

Paid a bod yn dwp

Regulars
  • Posts

    832
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by Paid a bod yn dwp

  1. Yes perhaps, though I think part of the reason for the Q&A is that it’s easier for Jason to see the points raised without having to wade through a long thread. I get the impression that time is a rare commodity for a small team Edit: Best of both worlds. Make a clear succinct post with bullet points on the Q&A, and put a link to this post there as well - I did the same for the hit point questions which had contradictory answers from Jason in the Q&A. If Jason can clear things up there, then that will free him up, as we can answer future newbie questions on his behalf.
  2. Yep the question needs to be put to him again on the Q&A thread with the points raised here. Be good to see the points succinctly put there be someone in the know - We owe it to RunewQuest ✊
  3. I’ve updated the Q&A thread question on this subject
  4. Yes, it could either be a single hit or culmaltive hits that trigger the x3 condition in those particular locations. I think that’s what the text is describing here. I presume cumulative hits to the vital locations are effective because of the vulnerability of those core hit locations relative to limbs...but also a big single hit is going to be devastating there.
  5. @Tupper I was curious and looked again at RQ2, there’s no first aid skill there. Which makes sense - I was surprised when you pointed out that first aid could be applied to each wound received. Meaning it can be applied potentially multiple times to a hit location. And also require more book keeping. I think what they’ve done is add the RQ3 first aid skill directly to RQG. RQG as you know uses the RQ2 approach to hit location damage - with the quirk that limbs only take damage up to x2, but can still be hit after that with damage only going to total hit points. RQ3 didn’t have this quirk, so I think *first aid* made more sense in that system. I think that’s partly why your finding the damage rules in RQG a bit odd in relation to first aid healing. It still works, but perhaps that was an unintended consequence of the designers combining RQ3 bits into a RQ2 engine, where previously damage was healed per location, not per wound?
  6. Yes that would make the most sense. Hopefully chaosium will pick this up, as I’ve come across a few people who’ve struggled with this section.
  7. The section on limbs is I think clear on this. Limbs as an exception are capped at the x2 damage limit. Once they get to x2 limit they no longer take damage to location. But can still be hit, with damage passing on only to total hit points. It’s quirky but I think the intention is to refelect their relatively less vital nature.
  8. @Jeff @Jason Durall We’ve put the damage rules through their paces and have found them to be difficult to settle on a consistent reading ( we’ve really tried ). Could you please help confirm what the intention is? We suspect an example may be incorrect? Is damage to all hit locations capped at x2, or is that just intended as a limit for limbs? It reads like it’s just intended for limbs but the example above muddies the water.
  9. Yep it’s a colourful way of simulating an horrendous hit
  10. Hmm...Yes I glossed over that in my Eureka moment. This example doesn’t work consistently with either of our possible approaches. It clearly states he takes 9pts to the head, but then as you point out he only takes 8pts damage to total hit points. If you interpret it either way the example is incorrect. It’s incorrect if we go with the x2 cap, as the head has taken 9pts, and it’s incorrect if you go with uncapped (x3 max) as Total Hit points have taken only 8pts. If we give the writers benefit of the doubt and the 9pts mentioned is before any reductions due to a x2 cap, it’s still a bit of an incomplete example. I’m starting to see why some people have found this a difficult section to digest. The x2 cap for limbs is stated pretty clearly. The x3 max for head, chest and abdomen is the default limit before the location has been pulverised/maimed/severed. After x3 it’s no longer there to take any more damage. .
  11. Yes agreed. Two-handed weapons don’t get an extra attack, they just come with a bit more damage. RAW - if you attack with a shield you can’t parry with it in the same round. However this doesn’t apply to weapons, which can parry and attack in same round. With two weapon fighting you can attack twice, and still parry a single attack once (and other attacks with culmaltive penalty) But as always feel free to tweak to your tastes
  12. Following on from my post above - I’d always assumed that the x2 damage restriction to limbs applied to all of the hit locations. A careful reading has shown that’s not the case. Now I look back at RQ2 and the wording is the same there. It’s talking specifically about “limbs” , not Hit locations. A lot of confusion could be avoided if the rules were a tiny bit more explicit about this distinction, and stating clearly the maximum wounds that each hit location can go down to. The distinction is there in the text, but you have to be very mindful. I think perhaps its helpful to think of the damage rules for *limbs* as a sort of exception to the general rule, which Head, chest and Abdomen follow.
  13. @Tupper I think I've had a Eureka moment... *Assumes Miss Marple persona* Going back to your original question, You were unsure if the special effects from big hits were brought on by a single, or cumaltive hits. We established that it was dependent on hit location limbs - Single blow (x2, x3) Head,Chest, Abdomen - cumulative, or single blow (x2, x3) This reading is based on each hit location description being its own mini rule set, with no cross over under the main heading. Reading them at face value - If its not mentioned in the text it doesn't apply, which I think is the style of writing in RQG. The problems we've encounted have been to do with applying the same rules to each hit location under the main headings. Following that logic through, the same can be inferred for the question: What is the limit that a hit location can go down to negative wounds? Its dependant on the Hit location Limbs - x2 Hit points Head, Chest, Abdomen x3 Hit points * Its a technicality and in practice your character is probably dead before they reach x3 wounds in the chest through cumulative hits, but it makes sense of the text and how its structured. It follows that if we use cumulative hits in the first point for head, chest, Abdomen to trigger special effects, that a logical limit of x3 negative maximum will be a necessity for those locations too. So I think Jason Duralls seemingly contradictory answers on the the Q&A thread are actually right ( if a bit confused about the distinction). We'll see what he says when he answers the question I posted there. * Note this would mean that its only the limbs that stop receiving damage directly once they reach the x2 limit. Head, Chest, Abdomen will continue receiving damage up to the x3 limit. It would also mean that whilst limbs can't take more damage in a single hit then x2 - The Head, Chest, and Abdomen don't have this damage restriction for single blows, as it’s not mentioned in relation to those locations. This models the limbs being not quite as vital as the core hit locations. Multiple smaller wounds to the core hit locations can eventually lead to *maimed* condition (death by a thousaund cuts).But the limbs follow a different rule needing the x3 to be delivered in a single hit to trigger the *maimed/severed* condition. Edit: Reading through the examples of play seems to bear out my conclusions. The example doesn't suggest that the damage to the head is capped at x2. He's taken 9 points to the head, which is 1pt more then would be allowed under a x2 cap. So this points to damage going into x3 max in the head. The final confirmation for me comes in the sub headings and how they're worded. - Damage Equal or Exceeds Double the Locations Hit Points, and Damage Equal or Exceeds Triple the locations hit points. If damage followed the same rules for all hit locations, then the headings might say something like *Damage Equal or Exceeds Double the Locations Hit Points in a single blow*. As such they don't, which to me suggests there are divergent rulings dependent on hit location, as i suggest in my think through above. ....I rest my case Your Honour
  14. Also if you wanted to target a specific area In combat you could use an *aimed shot* . RAW this would be to target a hit location, but if it fitted with the story/play style you could be more specific and aim for an eye.
  15. Yep that’s How i play it. Just debating cap to cumaltive damage - x2 or x3 Jason’s given contradictory answers...no biggie though.
  16. For clarity Ive asked Jason Durall to clarify the x2 or x3 limit on max damage to hit locations on the Q&A thread. Waiting for an answer...
  17. Yes agreed. It even says so on p192 of RQG: ...and regarding parries, p194 of RQG it says Which for me seems like a fair, and colourful way of dealing with the increased difficulty of parrying multiple attackers/attacks. As SR's don't represent seconds then this seems a good way of modelling reactive parrys in a round, with diminished chances of success with each subsequent parry. Like you say it would be easy to factor in other restrictions if you wished depending on circumstance. Guess it depends on your style of play. Isn't the rule for simultaneous hits resolved by highest Dex or best Dex SR modifier? Other wise they both hit at the same time.
  18. I was looking at minimal edit, to fit in with what is already covered in the other bullet points, which brought me to this option:
  19. Lets have look at the changed text in RQG... I see what you mean, although an improvement, it could still be interpreted as suggesting that its a choice between attacking or parrying. RAW you can can attack with both weapons and parry at the same time. Parry is mechanically unchanged in two-weapon fighting, and works exactly the same as 1 weapon fighting, though you can designate which sword is parrying and therefore open to potential damage. With that in mind perhaps @Jason Durall could reword that sentence to something like this?: Any adventurer using a weapon in each hand may use them for two attacks, and may choose to parry with either weapon alternating for each parry as desired. Multiple parries are subject to the culmaltive penalty. Any adventurer using a weapon in each hand may use them for two attacks, and may choose either weapon to parry an attack once.
  20. In answer to your question. Yes, the rules error I and others picked up on is corrected in latest PDF (regarding parries with two weapon fighting), and will be in second printing. Other things in this thread are more about interpretation and not errors as such. Not sure to what extent they’ve been clarified in latest printing? But it’s easy to gain clarity on those things in the pinned official Q&A topic by Jason Durall...or asking questions here. Edit: all the queries brought up in this topic have been addressed by Jason Durall.
  21. Not sure if *switching* is the right word? You’re already taking damage to General Hit points, in any attack. But I see your point. I think so long as you’re consistent in your ruling (whether x2, or x3 limit) this shouldn’t matter. Thanks to your examples above the question has been simplified. Do you want a game that models longer healing rates and therefore a bit more book keeping (x3 limit), or do you go for the game with a bit less book keeping? I still think the rules show a x2 limit to max wounds to hit locations ( though not as clearly as they could). As a player I’d prefer a little less bookkeeping, so that also suites me on that level. The x2 limit is also conveniently the same as damage that can be recieved through a single hit, so it makes sense to me.
  22. Ah yes you’re right. *first aid* can be used on the same hit-location once for each wound taken there. Hadn’t realised the potential multiple use of first aid on individual hit locations. It’s late where I am so I shall mull this over for another day, and come back to this when I can give it proper thought.
  23. It stands to reason that if you allow for more damage to go to the arm location that it’s going to take longer to heal. I’m not sure what you’re trying to resolve in these examples? The examples give you a good idea of what a x2 cap on wounds would do vs a x3 cap on wounds. X3 ends up costing unsurprisingly more healing as location hitpoints can go down further. One thing to mention, is that wounds aren’t as granular as you’re describing them in the examples. When you heal, you’re healing hit locations , not individual wounds. Bear in mind healing simultaneously heals General hitpoints and the location hit points. Be nice if @Jason Durall could clarify whether or not hit locations can take damage greater then x2 with subsequent hits? In the Q&A thread there are contradictory answers. My read of RQG is that the damage limit for hit locations is capped at x2 it’s starting hitpoint value.
  24. Yes agreed RQ2 is the basis that RQG is working from here. In my mind the x2 limit is like a mirror image of the positive hit points. So a 5pt arm can go down to minus/negative 5 hit points. I think this is born out in the text of RQG: “Limb: An adventurer cannot take more than twice the possible points of damage in an arm or leg from a single blow. Thus, a 2-point arm hit for 5 points takes only 4 points of damage off the total hit points: the remaining 1 point of damage has no effect. Further blows to that arm affect the total hit points of the adventurer, however.” Whilst it could be clearer, i think the last sentence does illustrate that a limit of damage has been reached by the limb, and that any subsequent further damage to the limb will only count against Total Hit points and not the individual limb hit points. This interpretation is born out by Jason’s Durall example in the Q&A I posted above. It’s a shame he’s muddied the water by posting the other contridictory answers though in the Q&A. But I think the specificity of that example points to it being correct when read in conjunction with the rules. Edit - here’s Jason Duralls example again for convenience: “Yes. If you have 4 hit points in the right arm and a sword hits it for 9 points, your arm takes 8 points of damage, which is also considered in your total hit point damage. But if your right arm is hit again for 2 points, you (not your arm) take 2 more points of total hit point damage.”
  25. If we’re looking at older editions to seek answers, it’s helpful to look at RQ3 also, which did explicitly cap damage at x2. There was actually no damage category beyond that. I think that gives a clue to the intended x2 limit that was present in RQ2. In some ways the x3 ( 6pt In RQ2) effect in RQG confuses this as it implies there is a continued scale. X3 is only intended as a special severing effect from massive damage in one hit. Damage to total hit points is still capped at x2 limit. Edit: but I think you have hit on an area which could so easily be made more explicit in RQG text.
×
×
  • Create New...