Paid a bod yn dwp

1 hour ago, MOB said:

The lovely cover of Dorastor: Land of Doom was done by Linda Michaels, and depicts a stained glass window in the Great Temple in Glamour. It is different in concept to the RQ Renaissance covers that preceded it, but I love it

Yes I really liked the Rodger Raupp covers, they were just what was needed to bring Runequest Glorantha alive again. I was minded of the River of Cradles approach when I saw the excellent recent Monkey Ruins illustration by Andre Fetisov . 

I totally agree on the Dorastor cover too, although quite different in style, it was really intriguing, and sophisticated in its lunar propaganda. It worked really well, i liked it a lot, but felt it tread a fine line IMO with associations with medieval western stained glass, but that was easily overlooked - A very unique cover in fantasy RPGs.  What you say about the Strangers in Prax cover makes sense too looking back at it. Lords of Terror was very competent, but I felt that the Orlanthi was too viking/saxxon in feel, and perhaps the armour of his opponent (Ralzarkark? )was too much like medieval plate. 

Having said  that I was really grateful for that period of renaissance, as it kept my interest in RQ alive. Thanks MOB

29 minutes ago, MOB said:

I still got the opportunity to collaborate directly with Roger Raupp the wonderful cover work he did though, which was fun. 

 

Yes I still remember that sense of excitement seeing your RuneQuest Renaissance period supplements. Those covers complimented the writing and together brought Glorantha alive as I understood it from RQ2. I missed out on the RQ2 supplements, having just the main rule book, so the Renaissance products kept RQ alive for me. 

14 minutes ago, Psullie said:

Right now RQ2's dwarves and elves do not reflect those races as we see them today. 

Yes, it's particularly tricky for new comers to see elves and dwarfs outside of the Tolkien fantasy mold. I feel the Gloranthan interpretation needs some really good colourful scenarios to introduce them. 

RQ3 Elder secrets didn't do it for me. Not having read it recently I'm not sure whether it was the writing style? I'm more inclined to think it was the awful and very dry presentation of the product. Perhaps the way entries were formalised in Elder Secrets didn't always fit the feeling for some elder races, in particular the Aldryami. Too conformist to a scientific analysis - in Gloranthan terms a bit God learner. Which didn't express the different nature of the Aldyrami.

I seem to remember RQ3 Dorastor presenting Aldryami in a much more colourful exciting way. They were pretty deadly from what I remember. 

1 hour ago, MOB said:

The baboon Melo Yelo was fun to play, because he desperately wanted to be a Sun Dome Templar and could follow them around and attempt to "act" like they did, all the while attempting to overcome his apely-urges.

Yes he was/is a brilliant character. Eminently playable. 

Got a soft spot for baboons, brings out the inner monkey in me. Much more playable as a player character then the more alien concepts of Aldryami and mostali. 

Looking forward to seeing how RQG bring these "alien" races alive.  Be good to have new scenarios that build flavour and spark imagination, showing how they can relate with humans.  Art is critical here, we need new standards to present unfamiliar concepts of the Gloranthan elder races. Particularly looking forward to seeing what Chaosium do with the new RQG Bestiary.

48 minutes ago, 7Tigers said:

Not really: Sartar KoH is both a sourcebook  and a campaign. Companion describes more several important locations, provides
extensive and exemplary encounters, and contains several adventure scenarios.

Ah ok thanks - So its more a case of Sartar Companion being the accompanying (essential) book to Sartar KoH. Useful as an addition to Coming Storm/eleven lights, but not essential?

36 minutes ago, jajagappa said:

However, Sartar Companion has a lot of encounters that could readily be used, plus has the description of Jonstown - a likely destination for Red Cow characters

Thanks - So if you wish to flesh out Sartar/Dragon pass further, the Sartar Companion would be the helpful complimentary guide to the coming storm/eleven lights. 

I wasn't sure how these books worked with each other. So Sartar kingdom of Heros is a separate (huge) campaign, and the Sartar Companion is more a guide book to Sartar that would compliment either the Coming Storm or Sartar Kingdom of Heros? 

This looks great - So this is the companion book to the Coming Storm. Nice Title, the cover image works very well too. 

Is it necessary to have Sartar Kingdom of Heroes, and the Sartar Companion to play the Coming Storm/Eleven lights ? 

38 minutes ago, d(sqrt(-1)) said:

 

A minor point but in RQ2 if you split your attack the separate attacks had to be vs different targets (p23 Splitting Attacks)

 

Good point. I hope in RQG that spilt attacks will have the same flexibility as parry and dodge in the new rules, in that it can be used against same or different opponent. 

To conclude my revisit to RQ3 and RQ2 strike ranks - I found RQ 3 puts more granularity into SR's. Coming from RQ2 the rule to start movement on DEX SR takes most getting used to, and the greater granularity to rates of movement are perhaps unnecessary from my POV ( though I like the idea of some variety in rates of movement between different humonoid species/characters).  The rules on movement and combat, which discount advantage/disadvantage of SIZ SR from attacks gives the players an extra variation to remember, but personally I'm not sure whether this extra granularity really adds much more fun to the game? 

Having said that, and to answer Jeffs original question, the thing that bugs me most about RQ3 Strikes Ranks is not the greater granularity, but the poor layout of the RQ3 strike rank chapter, which made the rules much more difficult to comprehend. Once I wrote out a simple summary similar to the RQ 2 strike rank modifier table, it became much clearer.  I can't think why they didn't originally make a simple Strike Rank modifier table for RQ3?  

The other 2 issues were the badly explained Cormac example of play, and the fact that other related Strike Rank rules were placed further away, and therefore slightly out of context of the main discussion of SR's. 

My feeling is that RQ2  strike ranks had a better balance through its simplicity. I can see why RQ3 followed the logic it did, but I'm not sure if the fun payback was worth it?

Thankfully we have a new edition on the way in RQG.

1 hour ago, d(sqrt(-1)) said:

Sure, but the sequence is to move unengaged characters and if they move half they can then engage in melee, cast spells etc which must be done in the resolution phase.

I always thought there was flexibility if you weren't directly engaged in hand to hand combat. If you're engaged in hand to hand combat then you can't move without taking disengage. In contrast If you're a spell caster or missile user out of close combat "engaged" then you can cast/fire and move, or move then cast/fire. Thats my understanding.

9 hours ago, d(sqrt(-1)) said:

However the example on p7 "Multiple Activities" has an unengaged character casting a spell first, then moving which doesn't fit with the Melee sequence.

I believe it's intended that "engaged" characters are only those in direct hand to hand combat. 

Yes that "don't start moving until your DEX SR" of RQ3, was a bit more then necessary rule wise. Got fiddly and a bit confusing with all the other instances of SR modifications. SR in RQ 3 became  a bit unwieldy, particularly for newbies. That and the movement issue is why I prefer RQ2.

i think in both RQ2 and RQ3 there have always been ambuiguities in the rules, where there needn't have been. 

58 minutes ago, d(sqrt(-1)) said:

That seems pretty clear to me. RQ 3 tried to make it into an SR by SR segment system which was way OTT.

Yes, Ive been revisiting the old RQ3 & RQ2 rules recently in light of the new RQG, trying to clarify my own understanding regarding movement in RQ2 and RQ3. 

To satisfy my own curiosity where does RQ3 imply the SR by SR segment system for movement? I believe it does I just haven't pinpointed it yet.

Edit: Ah ha! think I've got it. - The varying move rates per Strike Rank  of RQ3 implies that SR's represent real time. In RQ2 SR's were just an abstract convention to decide who goes first, not a real time simulation, hence the reason in RQ2 / RQG we treat movement at the constant unchanging rate of 3 meters per SR, and move in one chunk. 

4 hours ago, d(sqrt(-1)) said:

But the Melee Round sequence (p13) expressly says Unengaged characters move up to their Move, or up to half that if they want to melee, cast a spell etc. Only after that do actions in SR order happen. So how do you reconcile these two?

My understanding is that it should balance on the side of simplicity. At least thats how I would play it.

I believe its intended that if you make a move in a melee round its done in one chunk, you can perform an action before, and after the movement, you may even be allowed to combine moving with readying the bow (GM discreation), but its not intended that a character can move a bit, perform an action, move bit more, perform another action. SR's aren't supposed to represent seconds even though there are 12 of them, keeping it simple and moving in one chunk , avoids treating movement as a complicated SR by SR calculation. 

At least thats how I see it.

41 minutes ago, soltakss said:

I much preferrd movement in RQ3, nice and easy to use.

Wow -  I found the opposite. Its certainly more granular, but because of that you had the possibility of 3 different rates of movement to track per SR -  0.5m, 3m, and -1. Whereas in RQ2 and the QS you just have a constant 3m per SR rate to track, with the limiting factor being maximum of half movement if you want to engage in combat or perform an action as well.  I feel RQ2/QS gives space for me to role-play and have a satisfying crunchy game, whereas with RQ3 I find a lot more focus is taken away from role-play , and onto the greater granularity of the rules. A bit of a headache after recently reading the more granular strike rank rules of RQ3, I'm so relieved that they've gone for the more streamlined approach of RQ2. But thats just my take. 

On 27 June 2017 at 3:23 PM, styopa said:

Er...my understanding is different.

For humans, (MOV 8), they can move:

24m/round if out of combat.

8m/round if in a combat situation, but doing nothing but moving

4m/round if in a combat situation, but want to reserve your ability to attack/parry/dodge (likely including spellcasting other than rune spells, I expect)

So 1 MOV = 0.5m in combat, 1m in combat but not doing anything but move ("sprint?"), or 3m if out of combat entirely.

What's "in combat" is open to interpretation, or is likely better described in full rules.  Could an archer, firing in combat at targets that cannot harm/reach her, in the next round put away the bow, declare she's 'out of combat' and run 24m?  Unknown.

My interpretation of mov in the QuickStart is that it is exactly the same as RQ2.

The passage is very badly worded, and I think includes an error - 1 unit of MOV should be 3 meters,not 1 meter. 

My reason for that interpretation is that the last sentence states: 

"An adventurer engaged in melee cannot move until disengaged"

If that is the case then why state "MOV is usually considered to be 1 meter in combat" when movement in engaged combat is not possible?

I feel it's much more likely that the general nature of that statement was intended to be "each point of MOV is usually considered to be 3 meters in the melee round" 

That would be in keeping with RQ2, and avoid the overly complicated pitfalls of Movement in RQ3.

4 hours ago, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

Reading the rule "movement Within the melee round" p48 of the softbond Avalon hill reprint, it says:

"An adventurer moving within the melee round must start on the strike rank equal to his or her DEX strike rank.

During each subsequent strike rank, an adventurer may move up to 3 meters, unless he is performing some activity, such as fighting, spell-casting, etc. During the next melee round he can move  at 3m. per strike rank, beginning again on his DEX strike rank."

Further,this rule in RQ3 seems very significant change from RQ2. By suggesting that you can't begin movement until your DEX SR implies a "when" aspect that Psullie mentioned earlier...

7 hours ago, Psullie said:

Strike Rank has always been about who goes first, not who goes when. I think the mistake with RQ3 was that it tried to make a board game out of combat by implying that SR was a 'when' matrix,

The rule implies that any movement in a melee round must start on the DEX SR, but gets even more complicated when you move to attack, where presumably the rule "attacking on the move" supersedes it? It all seems unnecessarily complicated 

53 minutes ago, RosenMcStern said:

No, you are not correct. It works exactly like in RQ2. You add your movement SR, You do not count your DEX SR again.

Reading the rule "movement Within the melee round" p48 of the softbond Avalon hill reprint, it says:

"An adventurer moving within the melee round must start on the strike rank equal to his or her DEX strike rank.

During each subsequent strike rank, an adventurer may move up to 3 meters, unless he is performing some activity, such as fighting, spell-casting, etc. During the next melee round he can move  at 3m. per strike rank, beginning again on his DEX strike rank."

From the text it seems pretty straight forward a matter of adding DEX SR to movement SR (1 SR per 3 meters ). Not sure how else I could interpret that? 

Edit: Perhaps you thought I was still talking about the previous subject of "attacking on the move" where I was confused with and incorrectly surmised that DEX SR was added twice? In this case I'm just talking about general movement and Strike ranks, which does appear to differ from RQ2.

1 hour ago, Psullie said:

With regard to other actions, spells, movement etc. the 5SR penalty with DEX SR is just a mechanism for saying that somethings are quick and if you are nimble enough you might get to do extra stuff so long as your not engaged in melee.

If I read it correctly in RQ3 the penalty/deciding factor  to any form of movement is the characters DEX SR modifier plus the movement modifier. In contrast with RQ2 I believe you just applied the movement modifier at 1 SR per 3meters travelled, not the DEX SR as well. 

Adding the DEX SR mod as well as the movement SR mod seems a little over adjudicated. One calculation too many. You can always look at DEX if things are close in melee, no need in IMO to make it a permanent extra calculation 

Movement and SR

Turning the spot light onto movement and SR in RQ2 and RQ3. RQ3 adds another level of complexity to the rules.

• movement within engaged combat in RQ3 is reduced to 0.5M per SR, from the standard 3m per SR. In RQ2 the ruling seems to  simply be to half the max movement allowance in the melee round, still at the same unchanged rate of 3m per SR.

The breaking down of movement in RQ3 is more variable and therefore more complex to remember then RQ2, which keeps movement constant at the standard 3m per SR. I find RQ2 much easier to keep track of - At a glance you can see your maximum movement allowance for the melee round, and you know the standard 3m per SR remains constant.

Edit: To put in context RQ2 movement remains constant at 3m per SR. RQ3 varies from 3m per SR, to 0.5 per SR, to minus 1 per SR 

DEX SR and RQ3

RQ3 seems to push DEX SR into all SR calculations to do with movement. So manoeuvres that were relatively simple in RQ2 now have the added calculation of a DEX SR to consider/remember. Which feels like too many calculations to keep track of comfortably. Modifiers are good but too many start to make the game feel like Algebra. I guess its in keeping with the Avalon Hill RQ3 rulebook looking like a school exercise book. 

27 minutes ago, RosenMcStern said:

No. And this question kept us occupied for one summer, before starting to actually play the game, so I can understand why you are asking it

Yep, RQ3 strike ranks section suffers from adding extra complication, and not being clearly demonstrated in the examples ( or more specifically that example I quoted above).  I picked up RQ3 about the same time as you, but its been such a long time since I've played it, I'm trying to look at the rules with fresh eyes. Its reassuring its not just myself that has struggled a little with the interpretation  I remember it being a bit of a "study" back in the day. 

So - Looking over the rule "Attacking on the run" again, I see that it does indeed act as an exception to the first rule "Movement within the Melee Melee", its not an additional rule, as I first thought. So thanks, I see that example is indeed correct, apart from the movement rate you pointed out. Its just horrendously under explained, and placed slightly out of context with the rulings that apply to it in the chapter.

Thanks for giving my brain a sense of peace  

Ok - so the "movement within the melee round" rule of RQ3 is the reason for Cormac in the example above having his parry ready after his DEX SR. - any movment must start on the DEX SR. So that's the soonest he can pick up his weapon.

Makes me question whether his attack should also incorporate a second DEX SR penalty, as is standard with making any attack? Should'nt the DEX SR for "movement within the melee" round be in addition to the attack SR ( in this case the combination of DEX SR and Weapon SR )

This Cormac example keeps throwing up questions. I guess you could rule that Cormac is combining the movement with drawing his weapon, but still the example is so lacking in reasonable explanation.

The additional SR rules in RQ3 particularly "movement within melee", and "attacking on the run" to my mind only serve to over complicate what should be a straight forward process. There are too many thing to remember for a newbie. It's screaming out for a SR chart to summarise the modifiers. Coupled with that horrendous Cormac example, give me RQ2 any day! 

In comparing strike ranks of RQ2 to RQ3. Rq2 is far simpler to follow, with less complications. To compound this, RQ 3 really misses the simple strike rank modifier table of RQ2. With the new circumstantial modifiers complicating RQ3 strike ranks, a simple chart to illustrate modifiers is even more necessary but there isn't one in the RQ3 rule book - a very surprising omission.