Paid a bod yn dwp

40 minutes ago, styopa said:

So they did add in DEX SR.

Yes but not weapon SR.

I guess that makes sense - Weapon SR only comes into consideration for attacks not reactive parries. 

So in effect performing any action in a melee round is done after DEX SR (and any circumstantial modifiers ). If making attacks you also figure in SIZ SR and Weapon SR. Though SIZ SR can be discounted in situations when there is movement like "attacking on the run" or "opportunity melee.

I think I had crossed wires with the notion of Strike rank modifier (SIZ, DEX, Weapon SR) for attacks, and the action of simply getting a weapon to hand ready for parry. Coupled with the bizarr Cormac example which uses rules from "attacking on the run", that appear a good few pages later. Always thought examples should really illustrate something near to the example  

i still find the notion of "attacking on the run" a bit odd in that example -yes they're moving and closing in on Cormac, but the combat is then static. Much like the start of most combat encounters. In my mind "attacking on the run" would nesessitate a continual movement through the combat.

Thanks!

i don't think I ever would have made that connection to "attack on the run". Having said that it does seem odd that Cormac should follow those rules as he's not strictly speaking attacking on the run?

one other question, why does Cormac parry on his dex SR? Why not dex SR plus the weapon SR, as it is with attack? 

41 minutes ago, RosenMcStern said:

Who said that Cormac's DEX has already been trained? That episode might occur in the future.

Although I find it odd that there is a narrative to cormacs saga, but that this example is out of the narrative order.

Ok - So I've been looking through RQ2 and RQ3 again in light of the release of the new fabulous RQG quick-start. Looking at strike ranks in both RQ2 and RQ3 I'm amazed by how confused the description of SR become in RQ3. Apart from the much dryer presentation of RQ3 (feels a bit like working through a school exercise book), there is one example of play that just doesn't quite make sense. Here it is:

"Cormac and his new friend Signy Freyasdotter are sitting in a tavern drinking. Six city guards rush in, point at Signy and charge light maces ready.

Cormac's spear is leaning against the wall too far away. He stands and reaches for the hatchet at his belt.

The games master rules that these two actions take a total of 3 melee strike ranks to perform. Cormac's Dex Strike rank is 4. To Parry requires no melee round strike ranks, so he will be able to defend on melee round strike rank 7. ( He could attack with the hatchet on melee round strike rank 9.)

The guardsmen each have Dex strike ranks of 4. The weapons strike rank modifier for the light mace is 2, and they must cross six meters of floor - requiring the elapse of 2 more melee round strike ranks. They therefore, attack on melee round strike rank 8. 

Thus Cormac has his hatchet ready. He successfully parries one of the blows. Unfortunately, all three men swing at him and Cormac falls, minus one hit point in the head.

The guardsmen haul away Cormac and Signy (who had been unarmed) , first giving Signy a chance to help her friend with a healing spell (see spirit magic in the Magic Book.) “

First point of confusion,  Cormac's DEX strike rank of 4 is incorrect. If you’re following the examples previously Cormac had trained up his low DEX characteristic to 11, which should mean that his new DEX SR for this example is now 3. Putting that aside:

• Why is only the DEX SR taken into consideration, why not SIZ SR too? After all this is a melee combat?
• What is the SR of 2 that is added to get Cormac’s actual attack SR? its not mentioned specifically. Is it the 1 handed weapon SR of 2, or is it his SIZ SR of 2?

The break down of SR in this example is likely wrong ( feel free to correct), but also needlessly complicated. Why not just the single attack SR ( combo of SIZ/DEX/ Weapon SR) added to the 3 SR it takes to stand and unsheathe the weapon? My head hurts

Just now, styopa said:

Nice find, lol.  Not to throw gas on the fire, but it sounds a lot like a (clumsy) RQ3 version of an opposed roll to me.

Yes, I think you're right. I'm in no way advocating it

Following the discomfort of my full Ouruboros and the subsequent lie-down, I returned to RQ3 book and found this regarding arm wrestling:

"...In RuneQuest this struggle involves pitting Cormac's Str characteristic against Burly Bob's using the Resistance Table. Each player rolls D100, trying to obtain a result equal to or less then the percentile indicated on the Resistance Table. The Round that only one player succeeds determines the winning character." 

So thats how it was done in RQ3.

1 hour ago, styopa said:

 

I know you're not looking for my answers, but I'll volunteer my reflex views on your questions:

 

Thanks Styopa, thats food for thought. The suggestion of a reaction delay of Dex SR is a possible way forward. Its surprising how little has been written about delaying actions in past editions. Hopefully they will clarify these kind of rulings in the new edition.

@Jason Durall It would be super appreciated if you could just clarify where RQG stands on these two strike rank related areas ( pretty please) ? 

RQG - Strike Ranks. Can you delay an attack/action to occur later in the melee round?

Looking through bothe RQ2 & RQ3, I've only found one specific mention in the RQ3 rule book of delaying an attack. Its mentioned under "Limit to Strike Ranks":

"...(though he may consciously delay an action until later in the same melee round)"

That's literally the only mention I've found in RQ2 and RQ3 about delaying an attack/action. Theres no further details specified on the subject, which leads me to these questions:  

• Are you free to choose any SR after your normal attack SR, or is there an SR penalty involved in delaying an action?
• If allowed to delay an attack/action presumably, its a matter of stating a trigger that will cause you to attack, rather then saying I'm attacking on a specific abstract SR?
• Can you consciously attack simultaneously to a given trigger, for example an attack against you, or are you restricted to attacking after the "trigger"? 

RQG - Strike ranks. What happens if you are forced to parry/dodge on your attack SR, can you still perform an attack in the melee round? 

• Are you considered to have just delayed your attack, and therefore able to attack on following SR?
• Or are you considered to have made a "change of intent", thereby incurring a fixed SR penalty to your attack in that melee round (5 SR in RQ2, and 3 in RQ3)?
• Or do you loose your attack for that melee round?

6 hours ago, Mankcam said:

I think a shield losing 1HP every time it is used to parry is just a bit too fiddily for me. It may be more realistic with bronze age style shields that this could occur, but I just don't want shields breaking as regularly as that in my game.

Jason Durall has indicated that this ruling is changing in the full RQG rules out in November. It will only be damage in excess of weapons/shield HP's that will cause 1 hp dam on a normal attack. "Special" the same but all excess damage over weapon HP is applied. Critical gets nasty as the dam is taken off the weapon/shield directly without consideration to its Hp protection. See here:

7 hours ago, Manu said:

isn't it too much book keeping? Hp of the player (for each localization), plus hp for each weapon/shield? (OK, I'm whining a bit. I still love RQG)

 

I wondered that too. If it feels like too much bookkeeping its an easy rule to ignore, I don't recall ever using weapon dam much in previous versions.  I haven't play tested the damage to weapon/shield rules yet, but I have to say its starting to appeal. Its got potential to give RQ another distinguishing feature which again highlights the brutality of bronze age combat. Those parried crits could bring about really dramatic cinematic moments in combat I imagine , with cloven shields and shattered weapons.   

...Also quite handy skill to have when your parrying weapon breaks. Looking at the new rules, the breaking of weapons and shields could be quite a common thing 

You should read Jason Duralls  posts in this thread which give a very good insight into the QS and also the current state of the tweaked combat rules. I think you'll be happy with the changes to weapon damage in the upcoming new RQG.

19 minutes ago, Mechashef said:

I haven't seen the full RQG rules and I may be misreading the QS, but it seems rather clear that the QS rules work as I wrote (unless I missed where it contradicts itself later).

Yes you're right, the QuickStart rules are as you've written.  In addition the QuickStart mentions that parry doesn't use strike ranks.

If you read through the post I linked to Jason Durall explains the changes to what I presume is the final iteration of the core rules. As far as I know those posts by Jason Durall are the only detailed explanation to date of the new RQG combat rules.

1 hour ago, styopa said:

Parrying, otoh is much less sensitive to the attackers success level: Any successful parry will reduce the incoming somewhat or totally (granted, vs special or critical there's a lot of incoming damage so it likely won't block it all...but it doesn't have to: as far as the defender is concerned a useful parry is any that reduces the incoming damage to *an amount your armor can handle* or less).

Yes, this is a big point to bear in mind. 

51 minutes ago, David Scott said:

You can't really dodge when mounted.

Hiding behind a shield is likely more effective when arrows are raining down.

good points 

28 minutes ago, Manu said:

 

If I read well, you can dodge as frequently as needed. parry, it is -20% cumulative after the first try.

 

There's a couple of posts by designer Jason Durall which clarify a few things in the QuickStart regarding combat rules. First one is here, scroll down further to find his other posts 

To summarise there are some tweaks to the combat rules coming in the full version of RQG. In the full version it looks like parry and doge can both be used multiple times, but both suffer -20% cumulative penalty. So they are treated equally in this respect. You can use both parry and dodge in a melee round, against the same, or multiple opponents. The cumulative penalty works whether you are using a combination of dodge and parry or just one of the methods.

As I understand it we no longer have separate attack and parry skills. So improving your weapon ability to attack also improves the parry. I guess a lot of characters in RQG will tend towards wanting to improving weapon skill and therefore parry. So I can see parry % chance being quite high on average compared to dodge.

I suppose the USP of parry is its chance to damage or destroy the attacking weapon.

If I was to further distinguish parry from dodge I might introduce a disarm option under a special success, but that's just me thinking off the top of my head. We only have the abbreviated rules in the QuickStart at the moment to go by, full rules out in November.

...but if you really want to just get out the way and avoid all damage then dodge is best providing your % is respectable 

Ok - far too much time waisting here, but I've found specific mention in the RQ3 rule book of delaying an attack. Its mentioned under "Limit to Strike Ranks":

"...(though he may consciously delay an action until later in the same melee round)"

That's literally the only mention I've found in RQ2 and RQ3 about delaying an attack/action. Theres no mention of how specific a delay can be - For instance:  

• Are you free to choose any SR after your normal attack SR, or is there an SR penalty involved in delaying an action?
• Can you call out the SR number you wish to delay to, or do you call out a trigger for that delay and react after?
• Or can you consciously attack simultaneously to a given trigger, for example an attack against you? 

Also regarding being forced to parry on your attack SR:

• Are you considered to have just delayed your attack, and therefore able to attack on following SR or later?
• Or are you considered to have made a "change of intent", thereby incurring a fixed SR penalty to your attack in that melee round(5 SR in RQ2, and 3 in RQ3)?
• Or Do you loose your attack for that melee round?

Its free! Well of course RuneQuest is big in Wales. 

13 hours ago, theotherrhialto said:

It does become more complicated when equal SR and equal Dex. That means everything happens at the same time. So does it mean two attacks without parries, or two attacks and parries played before the resolution of the outcome?

I would go with simultaneous attacks in this case. Unless an intent to parry had been declared at the start of the round. I wouldn't allow parries and attacks on the same SR, same as the new RGQ rules in this respect. Potential for dramatic double fatalities. 

13 hours ago, theotherrhialto said:

As for change of intent, use the old rule: you can cancel an intention (not strike at a target that isn't there anymore) but not change it (change target).

Altering/change Intent - Thats interesting and perhaps gives an insight how to model a character loosing their attack due to making a parry on the same SR. RQ3 has change of intent as adding a flat 3 SR's plus the DEx SR. Although would the character be considered to be making a "change of intent" by using their attack on a later SR because of a parry? 

Its quite an omission not to mention the possibility of delaying an action in either RQ2 or 3. Makes me wonder whether this was ever in the designers intent? Certainly going through the old RQ2 classic there is no mention of a mechanism to deliberately delay an attack, other then the aimed shot example in the appendix.

Thinking logically, delaying an attack/action to occur an an abstract SR number is probably not RuneQuest cricket so to speak, as I think styopa mentioned. Its messing with the abstract mechanics deliberately - a bit godlearnery  . Where as delaying an action/attack to occur after a particular trigger is perhaps acceptable in game. For example waiting for an attack to occur before taking an action. Still, whether that delay could be considered to coincide simultaneously/and/or directly after is still in question.

Maybe I'm barking up the wrong tree, & the speed of which things occur in a melee round simply can't accomodate these deliberate delays to attacks we're discussing, hence no mention in either RQ2 or RQ3 rules books?

So the questions still remain:

On 30 June 2017 at 3:29 PM, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

So @Jason Durall to clarify my original question, In RQG If a character can delay an attack:

1. Can it occur simultaneously (allowing for the fact the player knows what SR the opponent is attacking on), or must it occur after a trigger?

2. Can he/she choose which specfic SR to delay the attack to, or is there some kind of SR penalty for delaying an attack?

3.If a combatant looses their attack through using parry on the same SR that their attack was due, can he/she still perform the attack at a later SR, or is the attack lost for that melee round?

12 hours ago, theotherrhialto said:

Wow, thank you for the errata! And the historical lesson. I didn't take time trying to look into other versions like the gw print of RQ3 because I don't have them at hand but I remember we kept the old rule when playing with the AH version. Cheers!

You're Welcome - I too started with the UK RQ2 edition by games workshop (just the main rulebook), then bought into RQ3 hardbacks published by GW. I didn't  try any of the other later versions, partly as they didn't appeal, and also I wasn't playing RPG's.  Only recently come out of a deep RPG freeze.

I too played RQ3 presuming the RQ2 ruling on parries was still legit, then one day I "properly" read RQ3 and was quite surprised by that sentence which didn't make a whole lot of sense in the context of the whole rulebook. Years later with the errata to hand now I see why - wish I had had the errata back in the day.

I think whether we played RQ2 or 3 we were always flexible with parries allowing their use in a fairly unrestrained way. Didn't take into consideration the need to be over 100% in parry to be able to split parries - we just parried  I like the streamlined way the new RQG rules interpret parry - you can parry & dodge  multiple times but with a cumulative -20% penalty. It has flexibility and its a simple rule to remember.

My two Blogs - I always imagined a smaller one handed weapon being much quicker and lighter to use then a two handed weapon. To my mind you're more likely to be able to parry and attack in a small space of time. Two handed weapons I associate with being heavier and slower to wield and less likely to both parry and attack in a small space of time, but perhaps doing more damage. Though its difficult to put a blanket rule on weapons types as there's always variety. I think they've got the right balance in the new rules, better to not slow down the game too much with lots of options, bit of streamlining is good and keeps the game moving fast.

Heres the actual free pdf - look towards the bottom of the page

http://www.chaosium.com/runequest-roleplaying-in-glorantha-quickstart/

It seems to be hard to find - can't remember how i got there, but here it is:

http://www.chaosium.com/welcome-to-the-runequest-glorantha-quickstart/

1 hour ago, theotherrhialto said:

After digging into my old book rules (I am a bit rusty, I haven't played RQ since 1988 I believe). I find that in what I call RQ3, the Avalon Hill edition, there is indeed a mention that the adventurer "may not attack with a weapon with which he parries. Two-handed weapons, however, can be used to attack once and parry once." P48 of the player's guide.

Funny - you're going through the exact same issues I did when I retuned recently to the rulebooks of RuneQuest 2 and 3.

RQ2: You're totally right about the Rurik examples in RQ2. They illustrate both attacks & parries with the same single handed weapon being allowed in a melee round. Though when you nitpick the RQ2 rules you'll be hard pressed to find that specifically called out. Its only really the Rurik examples that show us properly that this is intended by the designers. 

RQ3 Avalon hill/Chaosium: You're also right in picking out that small sentence in RQ3 that says you can't both parry and attack with a single handed weapon in the same round. However that sentence was a mistakingly included in the final text of RQ3, and was removed in an errata in later publications. So RQ3 also officially used the same ruling for attacks and parries with single handed weapons as RQ2. 

Here's the specific errata correction which alters the ruling in RQ3 to fall in line with RQ2. ( tried uploading the RQ3 errata pdf but it wouldn't accept on the forum, maybe some else could direct you to an online version of the RQ3 errata?):

22 minutes ago, styopa said:

I think you've gone full Ouruboros on that one.

If you're going to do opposed rolls, I think it's more intuitive to simply have them roll vs STR*5 (or *4, or *3 or lower, depending on how drunk they are) than to x-ref their stats on a table then roll against those stats. 

Heh heh - yes think i turned my RPG mind accidentally inside out...I'm going to need an alka seltzer & a lie-down

Here's the link where Jason Durall goes into more detail about the new combat rules, and the changes from the abbreviated quick start:

17 minutes ago, Psullie said:

You could declare holding off an attack to coincide with another's. RQ2 has that higher DEX goes first, if equal then both attack are rolled. Risky gambit

This would work if there is no SR penalty for delaying an attack. Be great to get some insight from the designers @Jason Durall?