smiorgan

2 hours ago, Arcadiagt5 said:

And who exactly do you think tested it, confirmed that it was a bug, and reported it to @dvdmacateer? 

Thanks a lot! I've a game on Roll 20 exactly on Tuesday.

On 11/17/2022 at 10:46 PM, Barak Shathur said:

This is what I meant (if I read you correctly), and how the rules work as I understand it. Since in RQG it makes absolutely no difference to parrying whether you have a shield and weapon or just a single weapon, you might as well use the shield as passive armour while you parry (and attack) with your weapon. This is pretty much the only way using a shield in melee makes sense to me within RAW. Otherwise it's just dead weight as far as I can tell.

RAW you can only use shields as passive defense in 2 situations:

1) against missile weapons

2) in phalanx formation (of at least 6 people) where you are covered by the guy on you right

Hopefully, we will soon see more rpg books authored by/ in collaboration with members of the depicted cultures. I think I can imagine just a bit, by analogy, how that Maori guy feels.  If even I, as an Italian, which is not a marginalized ethnicity (except in very specific circumstances) and is firmly on the side of the European colonizers, feel sometimes offended or, at least, irked when my culture appears stereotyped in rpg books, I can imagine how these guys, whose culture risked erasure, can feel.

And I'm really proud that there are now rpgs about Italian-related things made by Italians on the English speaking market (in particular, Lex Arcana and Brancalonia, which are both very good). 

So, I really hope these voices will be heard.

On 11/5/2022 at 5:49 AM, Mark Morrison said:

Marvelous to see some love for Perils of the Young Kingdoms! I had huge fun working on that, and fond of all of them, but most often think of Geoff Gillan's mad cathedral.

Best,

Mark

@Mark Morrison Let me say thank you, for all the fun I had with the run of supplements for Stormbringer 4e under your tenure. It was really chaos exultant! 

23 hours ago, dvdmacateer said:

Why post this here and not the the Roll20 character sheet forum? I have fixed it and an update should be available by Tuesday given Roll20's update cycle.

Great. Thanks a lot. I wasn't aware of the existence of a Roll20 character sheet forum. That's why I posted it here.

On 11/19/2022 at 3:52 AM, Arcadiagt5 said:

It’s supposed to support the “you can use any 1H sword at half your skill with another 1H sword”, e.g. if you were using a shortsword with your broadsword skill, you’d put in the Shortsword stats for damage etc, but link to the broadsword skill & put the half check box on. It’s worked for me before, I’ll see if I can do a bit of testing later this afternoon. 

Exactly. This how it's supposed to work, but it doesn't.

1 hour ago, Arcadiagt5 said:

From memory that function uses half of the skill listed - and it depends on an exact match text look up. So if you have a “1H Spear” skill at 10% it’s working correctly.

No, it's not working correctly: as the "1H Spear" skill is 80, not 10. It correctly gets the 80 in the column after the clock symbol, but then it "halves" it to 5%. I'v tried with several weapon skills, Checking the 1/2 box either has no effect (if you do that after selecting the skill), or reduces the skill to 5% (if you first check the box then select the skill). 

Hi,

To those who are familiar with the Roll20 sheet. When I try to set weapons at half-skill in the Roll 20 RQ sheet - because they are used with a related skill - I get minimum skill (5%) instead. Is it a known bug of the sheet? 

9 hours ago, DreadDomain said:

Copying your comment from another thread.

How about this? I removed the exceptions and color-coded (same color, same effect)

This is excellent. I will use it for sure!

13 hours ago, Arcadiagt5 said:

 If you look at the wording of Bladesharp it only affects the chance to hit, and Parry only affects the chance to parry. 

I had missed this subtelty.

I need to get the French PDF... maybe, just maybe, they streamlined that blessed attack-parry matrix.

8 hours ago, JRE said:

Not that I agree with it, but RQG in my opinion tries to separate heroic combat from soldierly combat. Soldiers all use shields and usually prioritize defense over attack, which is the sensible thing to do. Heroes, as they do in Chinese romances and in Hollywood, use two weapons...

That's a nice take! Not 100% convinced but that's a nice way to make sense of the rules.

By the way if you are a swordman in the foggy streets of Lankhmar you don't use a shield but a main-gauche shortsword, such as Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser.

10 hours ago, smiorgan said:

 

Repeated post deleted

10 hours ago, smiorgan said:

Am I correct in thinking that this applies also to shields?  So that you can hit with your sword and bash with your shield in the same round at appropriate strike ranks?

 

No, I'm not correct! Rules at page 219 explicitly say that if you attack with the shield you forfeit parry.

So, if you have trained a second weapon you get two chances to attack and you can use either weapon to parry. If you train a shield for roughly the same cost you only get one attack, unless you decide to parry with the main weapon which is not subject to the same parry or attack constraint.

A shortsword has 12 hp just like a medium shield, it has a similar base chance and gives you a second attack if you train it as left had weapon. So, no reason to train that shield skill. To use the shield as cover against missiles you don't need the skill, just the shield.

34 minutes ago, DreadDomain said:

 

Below is a breakdown of the RQG attack-parry matrix. It feels inspired by the Stormbringer/Elric/BGB matrix

RQ3 was much simpler.

 

Agreed. I'd say your breakdown is a "charitable reconstruction" of that table. Yes, the table is inspired by Elric! and by the slightly more complex one in BRP, but it adds more exceptions.

I've used it in play as written and it's not a tragedy but it does slow down play a bit.

47 minutes ago, DreadDomain said:

 

"With two weapons, one in each hand you can attack with both (subject to strike ranks), and parry with both (though only 1 parry allowed per attack) and subsequent parries (in a combat round) are subject to the -20% cumulative penalty, regardless of which weapon is used to parry."

Am I correct in thinking that this applies also to shields?  So that you can hit with your sword and bash with your shield in the same round at appropriate strike ranks?

I'm trying to figure out whether shields are really the red-headed stepchild of RQG combat or there are rules that make them mechanical interesting - phalanx formation and missile fire are, but in regular melee shields look a bit useless, or at least unworthy of skill points investment.

Small update:

I'm slowly recruiting the Sandheart militia.

We have:

An impala riding pygmie

A naive Sandheart farmer boy

A spoiled noble youth sent to the militia to straighten his spine

Two female characters yet to decide (possibly a Yelornan and an Eritha veterinarian)

Four out of five players are RQG newbies...

Lots of fun ahead 

2 hours ago, smiorgan said:

I love RQG, but combat rules is the part that impresses me the least. Sometimes I'm tempted to go back to RQ2 or RQ3 combat. 

 

Or to adopt the simpler attack-parry/dodge matrixes from Elric! But, I'm a tinkerer and a compulsive house ruler.

I love RQG, but combat rules is the part that impresses me the least. Sometimes I'm tempted to go back to RQ2 or RQ3 combat. 

Are there any rules about forfeiting attacks to gain better defensive options? Something like I do not attack this round and I get an additional parry at full percentage? Is this a thing in RQG in any way?

It seems that this is possible with two weapons (and weapon and shield?). The text on page 224 says:

"An adventurer using a weapon in each hand can use them for two attacks, two parries or one attack and one parry"

However, this text seems a leftover from the RQ2 text (page 28 in RQ Classic) and it is not entirely clear what "two parries" means in a RQG context, as everyone can make two parries if they wish (one at full skill, another at -20%).

Should I read "two parries" as "two parries at full skill"? And how does it degrade afterwards? Is it two other parries at -20% or the third parry is at -20% and the fourth at -40%?

12 minutes ago, Nick Brooke said:

Politics! Lady Vega runs the Sun County militia. Vega’s a Goldbreath. The Goldbreath Dynasty runs Sandheart. The Sandheart Militia is a new kind of force, made up of the famous “Specials.” So Lady Vega has an incentive to show that this new model of policing can cope with situations where more traditional Sun Domer militia might fail; the Sandheart Militia gets sent on tour; and Vega’s enemies in the Temple are going to try and undermine them if they ever get wind of what’s going on.

Pure gold.

@Nick Brooke is right. So it will be dealt in session 0 and by using an X card. No, detailed trigger warnings. 

BTW, I very excited by the prospect of running the Sandheart militia through that. Either I relocate the whole thing... or Allabeer's men (and women!) could be sent South as semi-unofficial and expendable (!) troubleshooters for a mission that promises to be either dangerous or embarassing or both. That would give the opportunity to travel through Sun County and provide a bit of Gloranthan lore.

And yeah a visit to Duke Raus' estate is a great idea. I might combine the two things. They could sent to check Gaumata's vision while on their way to the Lunar Grantlands.

Yes, as @Bill the barbarian said, trigger warnings are important for this scenario. Especially because some of the players will be strangers.

My dilemma is being specific enough with the warning without giving away important bits of the investigation.

For instance 

Hi, I'm about to run a Roll20 game of RQG for a bunch of Italian RQ fasns/ RQ curious.

I've decided to run Gaumata's Vision (from RQ3 Shadows on the Borderlands), because... well life is to short not to run it. And I wanted to move in the Sandheart district, to fully take advantage of the great Sandheart setting (Jonstown Compendium). It will be set in 1615 and will use the character generation in Sandheart vol. 1 

- MILD SCENARIO SPOILERS MAY FOLLOW -

I've a few questions:

1) How's Gaumata's Vision in play? Is it as awesome as it seems from reading it? For those who have run/ played it. 

2) Are there any specific pitfalls or difficulties in running it?

3) Anticipated issues with the RQ3 -> RQG conversion? My intention is mostly converting on the fly: add runes, passions and rune points as appropriate and use RQ3 stats as they are - including strike ranks.

4) I want to move Black Rock to Sandheart. I think it will become Cleft, which is just below the cliffs of Vulture Country. Basically, I move it from one backwater at the edge of Prax to another backwater at the edge of Vulture Country. Do you see any difficulty with that?

Wish me good luck!

Smiorgan 

I'm pretty sure a RQG adaptation for Middle Earth can work and as a player I would totally play it. As a GM I'm simply too lazy to do the work especially when you have The One Ring and Adventures in Middle Earth for 5e. They both work fine for me.

For a Silmarillion/ Children of Hurin game I'd check "Age of Shadows" for Open Quest. It's really Beleriand with the serial numbers filed off.