Bill the barbarian

7 hours ago, galafrone said:

i just wanted to know how the community feels about the HP being basically just a measure of CON with some little adjustments and not more the average of CON and SIZ

 

I liked it when it came out in RQ 3 as the average of CON and SIZ because it eliminated the need for a table (yay). Then I didn't give it another thought. When the tables came back in RQ G i groaned a little but... I do admit that I like the design notes of Jeff's when he explained that by large critters having lower numbers it makes it easier for the standard murder hobos to get another silhouette of a dead giant on their shield. Who doesn't want to go collecting dead monster trophies. after all. 

In fairness I am ambivalent. No tables good, killing big ugly rich things good...

Cheers

Just now, g33k said:

He is rumored to be something of a... collector... 

 

No, no, he is a collector of rare Nikes, a sole collector , one might say...

The above required much editing and probably still does, It you looked at the revision before now, I ha just finished many corrections so...

1 hour ago, Uthred said:

1. Can you cast spells that don’t target the opponent e.g. Bladesharp and make a melee attack in the same combat round? The text on pg. 194 specifically says you can but the text on pg. 195 about using either melee or magic attack contradicts this. The red is mine

Yeah reading is a good skill to have at a high level, I think I fumbled that one and did a lot of work for naught.

But it does cover many circumstances. so no use in throwing it out.

SO... Now I have had a look at 195 and as you say it does say attack or cast spells in melee. So let's assume that is right so I can salvage all that work and still make something of it

Quote

This means that an adventurer who starts a round phys- ically engaged in melee may either:

Attack and defend normally;
or Defend normally and cast spells.

. so I will revise the opus to say...

Casting Spells in Combat
Mk2™ 

Yes one can can cast spells, offensive or otherwise if you meet the following caveats.

1) If you are not attacking anyone in melee for part or all of the Melee Round and... see 2)

2) ... no one attacks in you (melee/ranged/spells) before the spell can go off (someone moves to engage close enough to get to you before the spell goes off or being hit and damaged by an arrow or a spirit spell  disrupt for example. A successful attack with damage will screw with concentration ruining the spell but not costing you  magic points.

3) You do not move to attack another (become engaged).in the same round as casting a spell.

The attacks mentioned before now are all melee attacks.

Ranged attacks are different from melee combat though they can interact with it.

1) You can fire into melee. You can fire at others not engaged in melee

2) You can cast spells into melee.You can cast spells at others not engaged in melee

3) You can cast spells before firing into melee

4) You can cast spells that have noting to do with melee.

limitations  are the number of Strike rank the actions cost, remember mods...

• if not engaged in melee you can advance to attack a ranged weapon user or magic caster see above for concentration for spell casters...

• If there is enough SRs other things besides casting spells can be done within the caveats listed above. 

• See SRs as related to moves, magic, weapons and SR mods on pages 192-195 in RQ RiG core book  for explanations of these mechanics of Strike Ranks, they are confusing, but necessary to run combat with or without magic so begin reading now.

There is a table in one of the forums around that will help to understand combat and SR, can't recall where. Anyone?

Corrections and additions as well as comments are most welcome. Hecklers, not so much
(ah go suck a lemon) 

Cheers

41 minutes ago, Uthred said:

1. Can you cast spells that don’t target the opponent e.g. Bladesharp and make a melee attack in the same combat round? The text on pg. 194 specifically says you can but the text on pg. 195 about using either melee or magic attack contradicts this.

 

Yes if you aren't engaged in melee (close) combat.

1) That is, you are not attacking anyone the entire MR (Thus,  you are not engaged) and... see 2)

2) ...if engaged in melee... no one attacks in you (melee/ranged/spells) before the spell can go off (someone moves to engage close enough to get to you before the spell goes off an arrow a disrupt. A successful attack with damage will screw with concentration ruining the spell but not costing you  magic points.

3) The caster takes no damage prior to casting of spells (see strike ranks) Damage will disrupt spell but not cost magic points.

4) You do not move to attack another (become engaged).in the same round as casting a spell.

The attacks mentioned before now are all melee attacks.

Ranged attacks are different from melee combat though they can interact with it.

1) You can fire into melee. You can fire at others not engaged in melee

2) You can cast spells into melee.

3) You can cast spells before firing into melee

4) You can cast spells that have noting to do with melee.

limitations  are the number of Strike rank the actions cost, member mods...

• Or if not engaged in melee you can advance to attact a ranged weapon user or magic caster see above for concentration...

• If there is enough SRs other things can be done within the caveats listed above. 

• See SRs as related to moves, magic, weapons and SR mods on pages 192-195 in RQ RiG core book  for explanations of these mechanics of Strike Ranks, they are confusing, but necessary to run combat with or without magic so begin reading now.

There is a table in one of the foruns around that will help to understand combat and SR, can't recall where. Anyone?

Corrections and additions as well as comments are most welcome. Hecklers, not so much
(ah go suck a lemon) 

Cheers

*

11 minutes ago, Matt_E said:

Thanks for that.  I do have a reputation to uphold.

Upon meeting a skull in a new forum, i try my best to keep my manners impeccable. It was the least I could do.

Cheers

1 minute ago, Akhôrahil said:

Why? That's a helm, a single cooking pot, a bedroll, a waterskin, and a net with some smaller items in. Add to that a shield, and axe, and a knife. It doesn't seem excessive by any means for travelling warrior, and if there's loot there, it's really small stuff. She can get the spear mostly free in moments, and fully free in a few seconds.

Tha feller with tha handle ah cain't say got it in one go. a blokawood sheildy fer a thing er two, an aks fer anudder an a kuhnife fer hadding a thing more, linthorax cuirass fer tree more and ya now has siks an a haf, add that to the 5 an thas eleventy an a haf, an she look like she got strong enuf fer 15 things at  about...

Alebaird!

24 minutes ago, styopa said:

2) what's on that shaft is helmet, pot, blanket, small waterskin, and a bag of sundries.  Maybe what, 8-10kg TOPS?  She's not wearing it on her back because her shield's there.  I admit I'm surprised she doesn't have a pack but lacking one, you make do.  I have to say more than once I've done the same thing with a stick to carry more things than I have hands for into/out of a campsite.  The weight rests mostly on the back of your shoulder, not the shaft anyway.

 

What is this eight ta ten kay gees  you is refering to, ah you kids with yer new fangled ways. When I was yer age I didn't count in no Kay Gees, nope used good old Orlanthii term; things. Why that could weigh more that half a thing a piece for the blanket and the helmet, for 1, a water skin a thing adding up to two things, put another thing in fer tha sundries to make it tree and then slap in another couple of things fer tha pointy stick and yer at 5  things right there. 

Kids, bah!

Kay gees, my big fat hairy...

Alebaird you git in here this instant 'n leaf them per folk alone.

Yes, ingrid my peach dumpling, honey bunch, little duckling...

Zounds!

16 minutes ago, Joerg said:

Take half a page of complicated calculations, multiply by zero, add 100% - voila, your chance for catastrophic interference.

Have we taken a trans-dimensional thread warp to Minimum Skill Chances, p'raps? That formulae looks like it belongs there. 

Hmm...

6 minutes ago, Mugen said:

From my point of view, the game designers arbitrarily considered that 50% was competent and experienced, but the game mechanics say otherwise.

Math doesn't lie!

22 minutes ago, Jeff said:

In playtesting, that approach quickly got clunky and confusing for many players. People had no trouble with the idea of using the 1H Spear skill for attacking and parrying, but viewed using their Shield as a separate thing.  Some people like using their shields to parry with, some people like using their attacking weapon to parry with. 

snip

Thank you for the designer's insight, That kind of stuff, as you know,  is gold to hobbyist and much appreciated.
Let me digest that, Jeff.

Cheers

1 minute ago, Akhôrahil said:

Imagine a veteran in any war, someone who really knows his stuff. You think what makes him a survivor is that he has the highest weapon skills? Hardly! He's just seen enough to know what to expect. 

Cool, that makes me think Ernest Borgnine in All Quiet on the Western Front. He could find a meal in 1918 for his wards when there was none to be found. Always had a smoke and a good word for a new recruit who was have a shitty time of it. Knew how to shoot but was like another soldier cept, he knew when it was time to use the toilet and when it was time to sleep. 

1 hour ago, Matt_E said:

Use Passive Possession by a spirit that constantly shrieks (or sings Britney Spears tunes, or whatever).  Treat as a form of ongoing Miasma that combines aspects of the spells Befuddle and Demoralize.  After a suitable amount of time, the victim develops the Passion Madness.  This nefarious treatment combines punishment (torture, really) and restraint.  They might kinda like Loz's narcotics...but they won't like this.

 

You sir, are evil!

5 hours ago, Akhôrahil said:

This means that if you want payback or revenge for someone the Humakti killed, you have to go get the Humakti. This is a problem in itself, in that they're really tough. So what you do is you gather some of your friends and try to bushwhack the Humakti instead. And this is why Humakti have Sense Assassin - they have to have it to stay alive when otherwise they would be revenge-killed in ambushes. It's necessary for the entire thing to even work.

Sounds about right. There are enough reasons to find ways to attack cult members  just based on its raison d'être  The reasons can not be avoided without changing the cult (not going to happen) so there may as well be ways to help avoid some of the more obvious hazards.

9 minutes ago, Ian Absentia said:

Nah, if that was truly a worry, we'd be having this discussion in the HeroQuest forum. 🤐  RQ is all about the mechanics.  Well, mostly.

 

Fair enough!

13 hours ago, Joerg said:

Yes, that's an attempt to create a synthesis out of five years of debates on the digest, and given an editing another five years later. It does a good job summing up some of the old concepts that circulated the early years of the digest.

 

That's pretty sweet man, danke schön!  And I am looking forward to reading your pieces.

cheers

12 minutes ago, Ian Absentia said:

Individual combat skills and equipment = PPE and task goals

Battle skill = HASP and task management

goddam, man! I was looking at it from a sheerly labour oriented side I guess but not understanding a ton o management speak I just googled all that it it sounds like we are on the same wavelength:)

I hate to break a lovely game like RQ down to mechanics but it does help me to grasp, it parse it and than try to narrate it back with the wonder re-infused.

cheers

11 hours ago, Kloster said:

RAW

RAW herring, you must be french!

11 hours ago, Shiningbrow said:

Since we've gotten to this point, I can legitimately ask - what should be the % chance of cutting down a tree with a herring?

 

Oh I would give it equal weight with the two of us getting into a Monty Python's The Fish-Slapping Dance in the next couple of days... (still on topic... strictly speaking)!

4 hours ago, Jeff said:

We considered that and rejected it. You are welcome to home rule that in your game, but that's not how it is presented in RQ.

Jeff, could you give us insight as to how that decision got made, no attacks just curious minds and all (I must be a Yinkin). It would help to rule decisions i make and better envision the RQ G combat meta-concept. I would like to get as comfortable with this system as I used to be with RQ 3.

That would be why; using Shield and any weapon for attack and parry would not be similar to any weapon attack and parry in the RAW. That is one percentage for both.

Cheers

So Luxus, as promised... so delivered! What do ya think?

15 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

If you're wearing more armour, you are probably taking more risks? I might rule half armour.

Sorry Phil, can't agree for a change. Work (which combat is) is a question of PPE. Personal Protective Equipment. Not any PPE, but the correct PPE for the job as a laid out above in my post. Wearing the wrong PPE or PPE that is not compatible with all aspects of ones job CAN (not will but can) lead to near misses, injuries and all the way to up fatalities in the wrong circumstances. the Orlanthi battle groups will agree with your thinking of wear what you can afford or own. But I am sure more ordered and unfortunately usually victorious in the end battle groupings of the Yelmalians or the Lunars wold be more in line with sections of battle groups wearing specialized armour to suit the duties assigned to said section 

Hmm seems I don'[t disagree after all, just a different cultural view to incorporate into my thinking. imo!

15 hours ago, Sumath said:

Battle is an abstraction of melee, so the damage you take using the Battle skill is also an abstraction (otherwise, why not use your melee skills?). It's not supposed to perfectly align with the Runequest combat system, but to approximate what happened to you in a large-scale battle.

Not much need in quoting everything you said You are looking at the problem in a little bit of a different way to moi but it all sounds like it's compatible with my thought tangentially.

Cheers

11 hours ago, albinoboo said:

Normal combat is about individual action, battle is is different skill set. If you don't keep your place in the shieldwall, your armour won't count because you will be overwhelmed by your opponents. Unless you are a demigod or near status, you have battle in formation or pay the price.

albinoboo does not say much but zero disagreement with anything he did say! As usual!

5 hours ago, jajagappa said:

 Somewhere in all that, your armor failed or did not protect you. Maybe you were encased enough that you didn't see and couldn't get out of the way of the bison riders charging in. 

10 hours ago, Sumath said:

and jajagappa well he is someone you should pay attention to.

4 hours ago, Akhôrahil said:

I'm completely in favour of this ruling, and it was what I expected.

and this gent is of the same mind as me, the rule is good as is. (edited because it had become badly mangled in spell check and made no sense, sorry. works now!) 

Combine Albinoboo's comments with Sumath's and all who agreed with everyone else note the tangents the thought took (they are my favourite part) and add my thoughts to the mix and I am satisfied myself. And hell, with my caveats most definitely throw in PhHibbs. We could all be wrong canonically but I am sure it will work or at least be fun. Are we right, can't say, Maybe someone will chime in or we can wait for Jason's official response but where would the MGF (maximum game fun) be in waiting?

15 hours ago, HreshtIronBorne said:

Does anyone have more information on the Temple of the Wooden Sword? My Google-Fu is apparently lacking severely when it comes to finding anything other than, it is a thing.

Neat topic, HreshtIronBorne!

21 hours ago, jajagappa said:

Because it's they are the People that Time Forgot living in the Land that Time Forgot! A little dose of Edgar Rice Burroughs will help you piece it together. 😉

 

I have never wanted to play in Pamaltela (Sorry Sandy!) before this, I have always wanted to play in Pellucidar however. What a great idea!

12 minutes ago, Mugen said:

A relatively simple solution would be to have skills like [Broadsword and shield] whose % would define the chance to attack with the broadsword, and the chance to parry with the shield (and that's perhaps what you had in mind ?).

Correct, like one weapon rolling an attack and a parry with the same skill percentage as per usual,  a pair of specialized weapons built for the purpose, i.e. a sword and a shield in this circumstance can attack and parry also with one and the same skill percentage. To me it just makes sense.  I'm surprised this was not done in RQ G. 

As to Revolution that's Rosen McStern's baby is it not?  Not familiar with the game, I will have to poke my nose in that door one day and look around. 

Cheers

52 minutes ago, Luxus said:

- Why armor doesn't protect in battles but it does in melee? I find this strange because what is battle but several melees that are solved by using single skill?

So again welcome, don''t feed the grognards They don't bite but can hurt your feelings with their pretensions.
Me, a grognard, No, never, not me.. . So...

I am going to guess here Luxus, So bear with me.

Battle may be a series of melees. but being dressed for the melee is what one wants to do. If your in the skirmish line where speed and the ability to whip a sling above your head are your skill sets, plate armour is not going to help and might will get you killed when your group follows orders and wheels around left at the double? Your trying to keep up and tripping over the weight of your gear as your friends wearing a helm and a Linothorax cuirass are easily outpacing.you. Remember, you do not have to run faster than the Lunar Chariots. just faster than Luxus, Yeah but don't he shine real nice in the sun? :) 

Another way of looking at it, one can succeed in battle by being a good tactician and wearing what he need on the field of battle to suits the needs of his unit, Whether that be plate for a heavy infantry or light linothorax for the agile skirmisher. Each will  have his or her place in battle and their own chances to provide victory for all.

David was a light skirmisher when he brought down Goliath (another sword and sandal epic battle with melees thrown in.)

Cheers