olskool

I don't use Defense as a regular effect.  Instead, it is often found as a Special Effect such as with the Shimmer Cat or for certain Magic.   I also don't use Dodge as a Basic (ie default) Skill.  In my Game, Dodge is a Special Skill taught by certain sects or cults as it is considered a "more in-depth version" of the dodging that naturally occurs in a fight (and which results in the requirement for an "attack roll" in the first place). Think of this Special Dodge like the "Weirding Way" in Dune (the 2003 version) or the Lord Marshall's "movements" in the Chronicles of Riddick.  Only one player in my campaign had this skill because he was a "Martial Artist."  The Dodge Skill in my game worked like this... The player decides to use Dodge (he can use his Ironhand or Weapon Parry too but that means BOTH of his actions are used in Defense and he will NOT be able to attack that round) and rolls under his Dodge Skill BEFORE the attack occurs.  On a successful roll, he subtracts the roll from his Skill and this difference is then subtracted from the attacker's chance to hit.  It can make a significant difference in combat.  Dodging thrown weapons was one level more difficult than a melee weapon.  The difficulty level is Average (base skill) for projectile weapons at Extreme Range, Difficult (1/2 skill) at Long Range, Formidable (1/4 skill) at Medium Range, and Impossible (1/10th skill) at Short Range.     

2 hours ago, Mankcam said:

I had a similar assumption regarding the majority of spirits being 'natural beings from the Spirit Realm'; although for PC Runemasters I felt that they would prefer ancestors and cult heroes as their allied spirit companions so I generally went down that path. Didn't get to play it all that much however, due to time factors.

 

Allied Spirits are a good way to introduce Lore or stories to a group that might otherwise not have access to them.

On 4/21/2017 at 5:05 AM, Yelm's Light said:

So, becoming a priest saddles the PC with all kinds of responsibilities in exchange for an allied spirit, a 20% better POW gain roll and a couple of other minor advantages?  Yeah, not seeing it.

People keep saying how difficult it is to become a Priest, but I haven't seen that either, barring permanent death.  I had one player get lucky with a few rolls and have the POW requirement within three sessions of play.  Add a year of service as an initiate, which could be a few months or less depending on the time scale involved for the group, and you've got instant rune priest.  (As it happened, it took him a little over six months to hit Priest status; he failed the examination the first time, at around four months.)

 

I had a number of players who didn't want those "entanglements" either.  The one Rune Lord we did have was "borderline" in his behavior.  I had already decided that "Allied Spirits" were more than a POW reservoir, acting as a liaison between the Rune Lord and the God.  I used to "council" that RL through the Allied Spirit (which resided in his High Llama).  Imagine if you will, a High Llama standing and quietly "chewing its cud" suddenly speaking up (in a perfect British accent no less) about a given course of action.  I had a LOT of fun with this.   

On 5/1/2017 at 0:44 PM, Yelm's Light said:

Sounds more like Storm Bull to me...

And probably smells like a defeated Chaos monster too...

On 4/24/2017 at 10:27 PM, Pentallion said:

Orlanth is the embodiment of the Air Rune.  If you emulate Orlanth and become as near to being an avatar of Orlanth, you're said to have mastered his rune(s).  That's the Quest in RuneQuest.  Not some physcal rune.  The writers for MRQ1 didn't have a (expleted deleted) clue what the (expleted deleted) they were talking about.

 

Keep in mind that Runes (or more accurately Rune-fragments in my game) weren't ONLY physical.  Runelords and Runepriests gained rune powers (like increased POW) in my game by being Ordained in a Consecration/Ordination Ritual.  They had no physical Rune for their powers.  They could lose their powers if they were Excommunicated for some reason.  The Runes were really for those who didn't want to follow an organized religion (Sorcerors and Shamen) in order to gain Rune Powers.  

In my game, these Runes were brought to Glorantha when the Block pinned the devil under it.  They rained down on Glorantha like a shower of gravel and are about as common as Crystals.  These Rune-Fragments are still "connected" to the Rune Power that spawned them on the god plane.  Not all Runes can be used when found, though.  Some are aligned to specific gods.  Some are tainted with Chaos.  All must be "attuned" like a Crystal (and I require the loss of a POW point for ANY attunement of any magic item).  These Runes are no different than the Items one finds in the Plunder book.  Also, keep in mind that I DO NOT require characters to possess a Rune to use any magic OTHER than Sorcery.  You can buy Spirit Magic without a Rune (although a Shaman needs a Magic Rune to "manipulate" spirit magic like a Sorcerer does).  Runes could also provide "special powers" if the holder had them attuned and was willing to sacrifice permanent POW for the ability (and temporary Mp to use it).  This is how I dealt with Mystics before RQ6 did it.  In this case, a Rune could have "varying aspects," meaning one person could use a Rune to "develope" one power, while another could use an IDENTICAL Rune to develope another power.  I kept Rune Abilities deliberately "vague" in order to tailor Runes to a player's concept for his character.  Runes could also be used to create and POWER magic items.  I created many Relics (powerful Artifacts, many religious) powered by Runes.  All of this is easily done now using the Rune Tree and Rune Affiliations.  This is one reason why I love this new idea for RQG.      

This is just how I incorporated and limited Magic in my RQ2/3 Game in the 1990's.  It worked well by the way.   

On 4/23/2017 at 10:46 AM, Darius West said:

I could see value in that.  It does complicate combat, but not much.

This is a pretty good idea, certainly simple.

Is it though ?  I thought Pendragon gives you base damage die, perhaps +/- 1 die based on weapon, and more if it is a couched lance.  Aftermath opted for multiplying the damage rather than just adding or removing a die.  There are similarities, but 5d6x2 is a lot more than 5d6+1die for battleaxe.  This isn't a judgement on which works better mind you, Pendragon is a good system for everything except missile weapons.

This is a good idea with a useful basis in factual info.  I would enjoy a link to this information if possible and not too hard to provide.

An interesting reference point and idea.  I would want to closely investigate how they arrived at the figure of 20m/sec, as I suspect many of the individuals may be stronger than the notional RQ "10 STR average".  Does human muscle power follow a nice bell curve distribution over individuals in a population like 3d6?  I honestly don't know.  The statistician in me feels uncomfortable but intrigued.

I love the ideas you have put forwards.  It is this sort of attention to detail that will make any and possibly all games better.  This sort of reference info could change everything.

 

The Energy Levels I quoted can be found at any Archery Hunting website.  They are internationally established standards for lethality.  Go on a hunt that's guided, and your guide will quote them to you.   The speeds I quoted for melee weapons come from a few "less exact" sources.  The first source is the old Spike TV series "Deadliest Warrior."  They used radar to record weapon speeds for their simulations.  Most weapons weighing between 1kg and 1.5kg (a very average weight range for a large number of melee weapons) move at around 20 m/s.  There was another series called "Fight Science" that also recorded HTH speeds.  Their results were similar.  I have also watched a couple of BBC specials (mostly on NATGEO) that had similar results.  The thing that surprised me is that people of varying "fitness levels" had relatively small variations in weapon speed.  It did not vary by more than around 10 meters/second.  I would have thought that the range would be larger.  Weapon weight was also surprising.  Most weapons fall into the 1kg to 2kg weight range with even huge weapons like Scottish Claymores being only 2.5kg and the largest Zweihanders (that were actually used in combat) or Lucern Hammers only running 3kg.  No one seems to have used the equivalent of a "20lb Sledgehammer" in any great numbers.  

I would like to see a more "reality-based" weapon system, but there are some real challenges to designing a proper formula for them.    

On 4/23/2017 at 4:39 PM, Atgxtg said:

The thing is, the damages in the game are not based directly on energy. This has come up a few times in the past with the firearm damages. So if you did something up based on energy it would mean redoing the entire damage scale. 

Realistically, it's a bit more complicated since a high energy attack that covers a large area probably won't penetrate as deep and do only superficial damage. 

 

Plus, with the way living organisms, and the RQ game mechanics work, damage isn't linear. That is, while the bullet from a 5.56mm rifle might have three to four times the energy of one fired from a  9mm pistol, it isn't three to four times as lethal.

 

That's why Energy (either Kinetic or Momentum based) is only step one in the equation.  The most important step is modifying Energy by a weapon's CROSS-SECTIONAL DENSITY. What's the difference between being hit by a baseball and an arrow when both have the exact same energy?  Penetration.  Penetration is defined as a FORCE having ENERGY, VELOCITY, and A VECTOR (direction of movement) MEASURED OVER A UNIT OF TIME.  Penetration is RESISTED by the material that is contacted/penetrated.  How MUCH resistance that material puts up is defined by the Penetrator's Cross-Sectional Density.  A baseball has a very low 0.039 CSD.  An arrow has a MUCH better 0.7 or 0.8 CSD.  A bullet will vary but Cross-Sectional Density IS the reason an arrow will penetrate an object that a bullet won't.  Additionally, some Penetrators (arrows, swords, and spears) will gain a MECHANICAL ADVANTAGE for their cutting edge.  The catch to putting together an "Energy Map" involving weapons is figuring out how much of an effect Cross-Sectional Density and Mechanical Advantage will have on energy.  Thus, the formula is MUCH MORE COMPLEX than just comparing Energy.  While I have some significant experience with Ballistics, things get far more complicated when other weapons are added.  This is why I have not done such a table.  It exceeds my Physics training and I have no idea how to even consider designing a mechanical advantage formula.  CSD could be a fairly straight-forward modifier, but how does one extrapolate the effect of a cutting edge? 

3 hours ago, Jon Hunter said:

Im guessing each round takes a while, but combats aren't that long, rounds wise

They aren't any longer than any other game. I did have a very experienced group that I GMed, though. The RQ6 game that I played in was a bit faster but between the "gamesmanship" involved with the effects and the fact that everyone was using the largest weapons they could (to maximise damage), it wasn't very fun or realistic. EVERY BLOW was a incapacitation in RQ6.  As a combat veteran (restore hope) and a cop of 20 years, I can tell you real fights aren't that fast or clean. 

I think you should add the "intermediate" level of Acolyte (for Rune Priest) and Disciple (for Rune Lord).  Give these two the reusable Rune Magic and a lower POW and Skill Level requirement to become an Acolyte/Disciple.  This would be a good "stepping stone" to Rune Level.   

On 4/19/2017 at 1:28 PM, davecake said:

FWIW, I found the 'initiate trap' to be not so bad in RQ3. I had a long running RQ3 game, and the majority of PCs were some form of rune level by the end, some quite experienced and dangerous. The Acolyte status helped. 

I even once had a PC qualify for rune level character creation, totally within the standard rules - a fairly old Green Elf (he rolled 15 on 2d8 for prior experience), he qualified for Wood Lord immediately (that 15 gave him 15x5 =+75 to a few crucial skills). 

I did find that sorcerers, allegedly a big play balance problem in RQ3, were the opposite - the 'apprentice trap' was far far worse than the initiate trap. Working a sorcerer up to scary magus status very hard. And if your character was not a sorcerer with significant previous experience at the start of play, forget about trying to become one in play! The scary super sorcerers in RQ3 books were wildly unrealistic in play, and mostly made scary by having hundreds of POW points worth it items and spirits. Your actual PC sorcerers very different.

 

I think they should keep the Initiate at "one use" for Rune/Divine Magic and 10% of income tithed to the Cult.  They should have to donate 50% of their time to the Cult, however.  You would then have the Acolyte as an "intermediate step" to Rune Priest with access to the reusable magic. On the Rune Lord side, they could have the Disciple with some of a Rune Lord's powers but not quite as skilled or equipped.  They could set the POW requirements at like 15 and Skill Levels around 75%.  They would have to give 50% of their income and 75% of their time to the Cult as they work their way to Rune Level.    

6 hours ago, Darius West said:

 One day when I am rich enough and have the time, I would like to drag out all the materials science books, physics books, cameras and instruments and "mythbust" a combat system from actual tested physical principles and come up with an objective scientific measurement of what constitutes an AP and a point of damage etc.  While I am sure weapon system designers have something already in place, I don't think they have retrofitted it for antique weapons.

1

I always wanted to match weapons to a Kinetic Energy Chart to see just how much damage they really would do.  I'd start with the Ethical Hunting Power Chart developed for Projectile Weapons like Atlatls, Bows, and Crossbows but expand it to include hand weapons.  The Chart is fairly simple and is based on the Kinetic Energy needed to "cleanly harvest" a given type of animal.  This would give a good "reference point" for how damaging a weapon would be.  The Chart looks like this:

25 ft-lbs or Less = Smaller Game like Coyotes and Varmints.

25 ft-lbs to 41 ft-lbs = Medium Game like Deer, Antelope, (and Humans fall here too).

42 ft-lbs to 65 ft-lbs = Large Game like Black Bear, Elk or Moose.

65 ft-lbs to 85 ft-lbs = Big Game like Cape Buffalo, and Grizzly Bear. 

85 ft-lbs + = Very Dangerous Game such as Hippos or Rhinos.

I think it would be interesting to set up a chart with Kinetic Energies from 1 ft-lb up to 100 ft-lb and match the entries on this chart to various damage dice.  You would then "compute" the Kinetic Energy for hand weapons based on the "swing speed" of 20 m/sec that many weapons experts claim as a standard velocity for HTH weapons.  This velocity would equate to a 10 STR.  I would bet that a 5 STR would still have about 75% of the standard velocity (or around 15m/sec of velocity) and a 20 STR would have a velocity of around 30 m/sec.  This would be an interesting start to a "reality-based" damage chart.  You can even fold firearms into the chart by dividing their Energy by 20 and comparing them to the chart.  Someday I might even get the time to set this chart up.  

22 hours ago, Darius West said:

It might also be worth increasing parry armour of shields and weapons based on a similar calculation to damage?  The other thing is, that your standing calculation doesn't factor in damage bonus, for example, a broadsword does 1d8+1, but many characters will have a 1d4 damage bonus for a damage range of 3-13.  As an alternative, you might consider reducing Strike Rank at a trade off of 20% for 1 SR.

As for the Law of Unintended Consequences, if you fear it, then do away with specials and criticals altogether.

 

 

 

I actually am considering this for play.  I use a modified version of MRQ1's AP and HP for weapons in my game.  So a dagger has Dam 1D4 and 3AP/20HP while a Knife (of the same length) would have Damage 1D4 BUT  2AP and only 10HP (due to its lighter construction).  A Broadsword is Dam 1D8 and 8AP/20HP, while an unreinforced wooden shield would have 4AP & 8HP.   I would limit the Skill add to 2 X the weapon's AP. 

Maximum damage ALWAYS includes STR bonuses in my games.  I just don't allow either the ridiculously high weapon damages or STR/SIZ bonuses that most editions of Runequest put forth.  That was one of the first things I changed when I started GMing.  High damage is almost as "game breaking" as plentiful magic.  Runequest was the first game of the genre that had minimum stats (STR, DEX, SIZ) for weapons.  This is a great idea! Otherwise, you end up with everyone carrying Greatswords to maximize their damage.  

2 hours ago, soltakss said:

My Great Troll with his Troll Maul LOVES you! 2D8+3D6 becomes 16+36=52 damage on a Crush! Yeehah!

I bet he wouldn't love me as much if he was a part of my campaign.   A maul does 1D10+2 under my house rules.  Here is my Damage Bonus Chart made in (gulps) 1986...  

Average of SIZ/STR:    Damage Bonus:                        Average of SIZ/STR:     Damage Bonus:

1 - 2                                   -1D4                                      25 - 28                                +1D8 

3 - 4                                   -1D3                                      29 - 32                                +1D10

5 - 6                                   -1D2                                      33 - 36                                +1D12

7 - 8                                    -1                                          37 - 44                                +2D8

9 - 12                                 No Bonus                               55 - 62                               +2D10 

13 - 14                                +1                                          63 - 70                               +2D12

15 - 16                                +1D2                                      71 - 80                              +3D10

17 - 18                                +1D3                                      81 - 90                              +4D10

19 - 20                                +1D4                                      91 - 100                            +5D10

21 - 22                                +1D5                                      101 +                                +6D10

23 - 24                                +1D6                                     

So your Troll with a 28 STR/SIZ average would do +1D8 in bonus damage.  His Crush Damage would be 12 (for the Maul) + 8 (STR Bonus) + 8 (STR Bonus) equaling 28 points of Damage in total.  He would also Stun Location and since I use Fantasy Hero's STUN Damage system, he would do 3 X (the maul's STUN Multiplier) 28 (the Damage) or 84 points of STUN Damage (which would TKO most foes).  He would also do Knockback... applying that 28 points of damage against the average of his foe's SIZ, STR, and DEX (how I figure Knockdown).  This means most foes would be knocked back 2 meters on average.  An impressive hit, even with my reduced weapon damages.  And since the heaviest armor you can buy in my game is Heavy Plate (10 to 12 gauge in thickness) at AP 10, that Troll is going to crush his foe like a tin can. 

5 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

LOL! That is where I got the basic idea. Where I departed was that instead of just using it for unarmed combat, I allow it to handle any weapon. Instead of rolling a random die on a hit based on the weapon (1d6, 1d8, 1d10 etc.), the weapon gives a modifier to the final damage. So a weapon that might have done 1d10 would get a +1 modifier to the damage. 

I also expanded upon the idea to handle stuff other than combat. For instance, is someone was piloting a vehicle, the EFFECT points generated would be used to "pay" for turns and other maneuvers. If crafting or repairing something  (mundane or magical) the EFFECT generated could be kept as a running total against a target number. Once enough effect has been generated the item is completed. 

 

It's still a good idea.

3 hours ago, styopa said:

Was talking with a player yesterday, and we hit upon the simple mechanic of 'stances' as realistic and potentially useful tactical options for RQ characters.

There are 3 possible combat stances:

Normal: allows you the usual 1* attack and 1* defense option in each round.

All-out attack: You ONLY get your 1* attack at half-again your skill.  You get no defense action.

All-out defense: You ONLY get your 1* defense at half-again your skill.  You get no attack action.

*: as usual, if >100% you can split

The above is probably the simplest version.  Then the Minotaur's 'enrage' doesn't have to give them a special magical ability, it just puts them into all-out attack mode.  It also makes missile weapons more lethal (if you allow it to everyone), if the shooter isn't threatened by immediate attack.

Alternate versions, not really thought through:

- Attack/Defense stance lets you split attacks/defenses using that higher value, even if it's not above 100% (you don't care about getting hit)?

- Attack lets you attack slightly faster (no hesitation for self-preservation)?

- Defense might allow a shield to parry multiple attacks from a single attacker (ie like a normal dodge, but at half value for subsequent attacks after the first), or to allow dodge to be used against multiple attackers (but at half-value for each dodge after the first)

- Defense might even allow additional AP to a parrying item (1d4 or your strength mod, whichever's greater, re-rolled for each attack), or allow a SPECIAL parry to still count against a CRITICAL hit (the current way a normal shield success works against a special)?

NOTE: NPCs wouldn't be able to access stances unless it is something intrinsically sensible to the NPC - ie a minotaur.  Otherwise NPCs (who often don't care about tomorrow) would be overpowered.

Anyway, just some ideas we were bouncing around.

 

This would work nicely with my skill based damage idea.  Let the attacker choose between a Skill Bonus or increased Damage (limited by the maximum possible rolled Damage of course).  I would limit the Skill Bonus to Either 1/2 Weapon Skill OR [the average of DEX and STR] (whichever bonus is LOWER when figured) to prevent higher skill levels making this action too overpowered.   For the Parry, you could do Skill Bonus OR allow every 10 points of Skill rolled under to increase AP by one (ie a 30% roll with a 70% Skill would net a 4 AP bonus).  I'd limit the AP bonus to DOUBLE a weapon's AP as a cap.

Multiple Attacks:

I don't understand why a person with less than 100% cannot make attacks on two different opponents.  I allow this in my game but the attacker must have sufficient Strike Ranks to do it and they CANNOT parry with the weapon they use to make the two attacks with.  I simply cut their skill in half (rounding down) for BOTH attacks.  They can also parry TWO opponents as long as they DO NOT use a weapon for more than TWO ACTIONS... be those Parries or Attacks (a good reason for two weapon use). 

Missile Weapons:

I have 4 Range Bands for my missile weapons; Short Range, Medium Range, Long Range and Extreme Range.  Each of these range bands has a reducing chance to hit (Normal skill at Sht Rng, 3/4 skill at Med Rng, 1/2 skill at Lng Rng, and 1/4 skill at Ext Rng).  I would allow an "Aim" action to double the chance to hit.  I also would increase the Strike Ranks needed for this attack by doubling them (my base SRs by range band are: 1@SHT, 2@MED, 3@LNG, 4@EXT to take into account aiming and "projectile flight time").

I think this idea should be explored more. 

Quote

In my game, Encumbrance determines how many STUN points you lose to Fatigue (this comes off of the STUN total as well).  I use weight (in Kilos) and Bulk (in points) ala Twilight2000 V2.2 for Encumbrance because I'm very familiar with it.  The more weight you are carrying, the more STUN you burn per round.  My STUN by weight for a character with a STR (and CON) of 10 would be:

 Light ENC (10kg or a little more than 20lbs, about the weight of a police officer's duty gear): 1 STUN per round

 Moderate ENC (20kg or almost 45lbs, about the weight of a soldier's LBE or Chest Rig when fully loaded): 2 STUN per round

 Heavy ENC (30kg or more than 65lbs, about the weight of a soldier's load when SAPI Plate armor is included): 3 STUN per round

 Burdened (40kg or more than 85lbs, the "road march" weight of an UNARMORED soldier with an "assault pack"): 4 STUN per round 

 Overburdened (50kg or more than 100lbs, the "road march" weight of an ARMORED soldier with an "assault pack"): 5 STUN per round.

Recovering Fatigue is done by resting for a combat round.  If a character does NOTHING for one combat round, he may regain up to his CON in STUN if he rolls CON x 5.  Resting for 10 minutes will regenerate a character's STUN completely, but this is dangerous to do in a "dungeon."  Healing regenerates the Caster's POW in STUN for every Intensity of the spell (ie a Healing 2 will give the recipient 2 X Caster's POW of STUN back). 

You will have to adjust this to the "Things of ENC" Runequest uses.  This shouldn't be too hard though.

 

 

 

On 4/2/2017 at 11:02 AM, Atgxtg said:

Interesting. How do you handle POW improvement? And do you use WILLpower or POW for resistance rolls? 

Resistance and POW Rolls:

 I'm sorry I didn't answer this properly last night.  Keep in mind that I am basing my house rules on an RQ campaign using the "attuning" of Runes (similar to MRQ1) NOT BRP.  My POW rolls are still done the same way but are based on the successful casting of a spell, attuning of a magic item, or spirit combat.  For instance, I wanted to reduce the frequency of Spirit Magic in my own game.  I now require that you pay a Shaman the money for a spell.  He then summons a spirit which knows the spell in question.  The spirit then attempts to "teach" you the spell, which entails rolling [the average of INT & WILL] x 5 (originally it was POW x 5).  If you succeed, you now "owe" the spirit for teaching you that spell.  Payment comes in the form of the loss of a point of POW.  The bright side is that learning a spell nets you a POW gain roll in my game.  

As for Resistance rolls, this is a bit harder.  For some spells (Disruption immediately comes to mind) I still use POW versus POW.  This is because you are trying to "overcome" your opponent's "life force" (as represented by current POW).  Other spells will use a differing resistance roll.  I have a spell based on the AD&D Suggestion spell.  The resistance roll for this spell pits your CHA against the target's INT.  Finally, I have some spells that manifest physical effects.  These effects are IMMUNE to Counter Magic (because they are physical) but require the caster to make an "attack roll" using DEX x 5 (and I do allow experience roll for these attacks) and armor protects against these effects.  Power Bolt, Fireball, and Lightning Bolt are some examples of this type of spell (from my homebrew list).

Alternate POW Determination:

Another method for determining POW that will favor spellcasters over fighters (I play Runequest, not BRP so these are one in the same) is to take INT, WILL, and CHA and average them.  This will remove the characteristics which fighters favor and they will have a lower POW as a result.  The Max POW could be left at 25 or you could lower it (making it my 20 max for characteristics for instance).  This is fairly arbitrary by design and you should set YOUR POW limit based on how powerful you want your Mages to be.        

1 minute ago, Jusmak said:

Can this stun damage system be easily found somewhere? Or could you tell simply it's basics? Sounds good. If I was using fatique system in RQ3, then success in martial arts and extra dice roll could be used to decrease fatique. 

I think most exiting combat was at skill level 50-70. So, I think best thing to do is to use give option to decrease opponents parry the percentage skill is over 100% and contrary, as there is option to do two attacks at half skill.

Armor coverage sounds also interesting way to keep characters vulnerable enough to maintain exitement in fights.

 

 

I don't know if this violates any Copyrights laws, I'll take it down if it does.  The system is located in Fantasy Hero the RPG (a good reference but VERY CRUNCHY even by MY standards).  Stun damage is a form of fatigue damage that renders you unconscious.  I used CON + STR + WILL (I added this) as the base damage for STUN. Exceed this and you're out.  When fist fighting, every 5 full points of STUN damage results in 1 point of KILLING damage (taken off of HP) in addition to the STUN Damage.  Punch damage is based on a chart like the STR Damage chart.  Damage starts at 1D4 and runs into LARGE Multiple dice for things like Trolls.  When you hit for STUN damage and roll the Location, each of the locations has a STUN MULTIPLIER that you're rolled damage is multiplied by.  Those Multipliers are:  Head X2, Chest X1, Abdomen X1.5, Arms X0.5, and Legs X0.5.  After multiplying the damage by the Location Stun Multiplier you subtract it from your [CON+STR+WILL] Stun Total like they were Hit Points.  Armor does absorb STUN Damage.

Weapons also do STUN Damage.  Every weapon has a STUN MULTIPLIER ranging from X1 up to X5.  The weapon's rolled damage is multiplied by this number and that amount of STUN damage is then checked against the Location Multiplier.  For Instance, A Broad Sword (damage 1D8 in my game) hits for 4 points of HP Damage.  It has a Stun Multiplier of X2 so it does 8 STUN in addition to the killing damage.  The player rolls left leg (Stun Multiplier X0.5) and the STUN Damage is reduced to 4 again and applied to the character's Stun Damage track.  As a general rule:

Arrows, Daggers, and Spears are X1 Stun Multipliers

Swords and Axes are X2 Stun Multipliers

Hammers are X3 Stun Multipliers

Maces are X4 Stun Multipliers

Whips are X5 Stun Multipliers

The STUN Damage allows you to vary your weapon's damages to closer replicate real world weapons.  For instance, the Nightclub/Single Stick in my game now does 1D4 Damage but with a X4 STUN Multiplier.  It doesn't kill as easily (like in real life) but will do up to 16 STUN in a single blow.  This makes it great for "braining" drunken characters WITHOUT killing them in that bar fight.  The Warhammer falls in between with a Damage of 1D6 +1 but a STUN Multiplier of X3.  It can manage 21 points of STUN Damage.  A battle axe doing 1D6+2 with a X2 STUN Multiplier will do the same STUN as that nightstick.

I highly recommend you get a copy of Fantasy Hero and check out Stun Damage for yourself.  

Treasure Factors:

I hope they keep the Treasure Factor Rating system on page 92 of RQ2.  It was abandoned in RQ3 and this was a mistake.  I actually changed the term from Treasure Factor to Threat Factor because of it's real utility.  The true value of it is in helping beginning GMs "balance" monsters to their character's skill levels.  To do this, the GM just determines the Treasure Factors of all his player's characters.  He then compares them to the Treasure Factors of the monsters to ensure that his monsters are powerful enough to challenge the players but not so powerful that the characters are slaughtered.  This is an invaluable tool for a new GM.

Change Treasure Factor to Threat Factor and add it to the monsters section.        

23 hours ago, hkokko said:

This "clink" syndrome was frequently encountered worry in our long campaign with RQ2/Rq3 from 1983 onwards. We played in the first intensive stretch of a campaing about once a week very regularly for almost 20 years or so. Eventually all of the players were rune lords or rune priests with iron armor and shield + protection spells - which means a lot of protection to go thru if you pass the parry. Few of the players managed to get several of their consecutive characters to be rune lords. With enough playing that eventually happens and does not have to take years to do. I think the highest fighting skill number was in the 160s for a Lanbril with Orlanthi and Humakti not far behind. 

Individual fights with high skilled opponent or even with multiple opponents often became quite boring and long with attack/parry sequence lasting for a night or with Cradle scenario - multiple nights waiting for the failure in parry + critical attack combination to get enough thru the high armor and magic to cause any real harm. So "prepared" fights - (players have armor on and are looking for trouble - the opponents as well) became a thing to avoid - go for faction intrigue, mysteries, constrained scenarios (being in a city without your massive armor and weapons), non fighting missions, stripping you somehow of the weapons or tactics, restarting with novice characters and many other things that helped but caused sometimes dissatisfaction from many of the players who liked to be powerful in fights, liked the fights originally and earned their experience and equipment with long play with their well loved characters. Players liked the crunch of the system - that is why we play RQ - but the original RQ2/RQ3 fights broke down into a grind in the above scenarios. Players liked Glorantha - that is why we still play there. 

 Your mileage will vary (and must have done so). 

 

I countered this with a reality based armor system.  It does add a bit of "crunch" (just call me "crunch master") but it works.  Armor doesn't cover 100% of a location.  My old RBR Level 3A Ballistic Vest only covered about 80% of my chest and 20% of my abdomen.  My AR500 Plate Carrier only covers about 75% of my chest.  I gave each piece of armor a % of Coverage Rating.  A Cuirass would cover between 90% and 95% (if well fitted).  I would roll percentile dice at the same time I rolled 1D20 for location.  The player would check to see if my percentage roll exceeded his Coverage Rating.  If it did, the armor was bypassed.  

I would also allow Armor Damage.  Whenever weapon damage exceeded an armor's AP, that armor would take damage.  This damage was recorded as a reduction in that armor's Coverage Rating. Crushing weapons would do but 1% Damage to the armor's Coverage Rating (reducing a 90% to 89%).  Impaling weapons like arrows, daggers, and spears would do 1D3% Damage to an armor's Coverage Rating.  Slashing weapons like axes and swords would do 1D6% of Damage to the armor's Coverage Rating.  

If the weapon's damage was 2 X AP, you would add 1 to the Damage Roll BUT the MAXIMUM ROLL COULD NOT BE EXCEEDED (ie 1D3 roll maxed at three).  If the weapon's damage was 3 X AP, you would add 2 to the Damage Roll (max cannot be exceeded).  This continued on until you hit the maximum damage rollable.      

Shields were treated like weapons in that they had both an AP and a HP.  Every time the shield's AP was exceeded, it lost a HP.  This eventually results in a broken shield.  Because of these house rules, my players never felt like they could take on the Barbarian Horde singlehandedly.  

On 4/16/2017 at 6:09 PM, Jusmak said:

At first it was bad idea to put a fight between two combatants both having plate armor and knifes as a weapon. But when getting older and  having better understanding of basic rules, there comes improvising. It may become frustrating trying to harm a person in plate, so why doing so? Start wrestling, and if you have both hands empty, aimed wrestle to head. Do you get hold, if do, and dice is under martial art skill. you may choke opponent. Next round suffocation rules apply.

Knockback rules do a lot good.

Joint locks were developed for hurting armored opponents. Martial arts as a skill needs a bit developing. It is dull and unrealistic to use in RQ3, there is no sense, that any kick is doing 2D6 damage, more than battle axe or heavy mace or any 1 handed sword. Rather see, that success in martial arts should lead into tactical or positional advantage, leg sweep, intentional knock back, choking, joint locks (instead of throwing opponent doing extra damage directly to arm or leg)

 

 

I actually imported the STUN DAMAGE system from Fantasy Hero.  The Fantasy Hero STUN Damage system and RQ mesh like they were made for each other! 

On 4/13/2017 at 6:51 PM, Atgxtg said:

I did just that in another thread. Basically you use the 10s digit as the damage and the 1s digit as the hit location. It's not all that complicated. But I do think the base chances have to be a bit higher for it to work. 

 

Does TSR(Wizards of the Coast?) know you're ripping off Top Secret SI?

On 4/10/2017 at 10:29 AM, g33k said:

Here's a thought:  rather than do it as added damage on top of the roll, raise it from the bottom as a MINIMUM roll.

That is, if you think a +3 damage is due the character because of skill, then read all dice that roll below-average as 3 higher than the natural roll.

This doesn't affect the high end, per-weapon damage caps, etc... just means that the skilled character never gets a crap-for-damage roll.

 

 

This very close to what I suggested.  My idea is based on the concept that Skill should influence Damage in combat.  The idea I suggested is employed by Twilight2013 and is referred to as a Margin of Success (there are also Margins of Failure).  In Twilight2013,  When you hit someone, you subtract the difference between your skill and your roll.  This total is added to the weapon's Base Damage to equal the total damage the target takes.  What I'm proposing is adding the difference between your Skill and your roll divided by 10 (rd) to the damage roll.  You still cannot do more damage than a maximum damage roll would do but you won't do 1 point either.  The reason you use the difference between the roll and your skill is that conditions in combat change.  This may cause your skill to be reduced, thus reducing the "bonus damage" you might do.     

19 minutes ago, g33k said:

I'm honestly not clear on everything you're saying here.  You're using some terms in ways that make me think you mean something other than what I mean...

At first, I thought we were missing on "crunch" -- RQ6/Mythras is usually taken to be the "crunchiest" of the BRP/d100 family; I didn't think you wanted more crunch than that!  But when I see you've got your players whipping out the calculators for every action in-combat, I guess we're aligned on what "crunch" is.     FWIW, that's more "crunch" than I'm interested in handling in my RPGs ... a LOT more.

Then I got to "runes."  Maybe I'm missing something else, but you talk about "attuning a Magic Rune" and say "Spirit Runes are scarce" and "a Shaman had to find a Magic Rune," and "Runes are actively hunted."   I have never taken RQ-style "Runes" to be physical objects to be found, nor for there to be multiple instances of any given Rune (like magic-items or crystals); but the way you talk about Runes, it seems like you DO seem them more like magic items.  Am I missing something again?  Or are you playing "Runes" as physical objects?

 

 

MRQ1 had runes as being physical items (like POW crystals) that had to be "attuned."  I also evolved this similar idea in the early 90's.  I wanted a way to control magic in my game so everyone and his brother wouldn't load up a Counter Magic 3 and Protection 4.  I saw this as RuneQuest's equivalent of giving fighters in AD&D Plate Armor at second level.  I, therefore, ruled that you had to sacrifice POW to gain Spirit Magic just like Rune Magic.  The whole process went like this; You would pay a Shaman the money for a spell.  He would summon a Spirit who would impart the magic to you and teach you the spell's incantation and how to properly draw the spell's focus.  You would roll your POW X 5 or lower to learn this.  If the roll was successful, you now "owed" the spirit for that "knowledge."  Payment came in the loss of a POW point BUT learning the spell entitled you to a POW gain check.  You could only cast that spell at 1 Level of Intensity (I adjusted all the Spells to mirror this).

A Shaman (or anyone who found a Magic Rune) could choose to use a Magic Rune that he "attuned" (just like attuning a crystal but with a rune having 2D6 +12 POW) to "up" the power of spirit magic (so could Rune Priests who used Cult Spirit Spells).  He got the multiple levels that the basic game added to normal users (for every spell) but had to sacrifice POW for each new level.  There was a bit of a power issue here.  Sorcerers and Rune Priests gained the power to make really powerful magic using Rituals and Ceremony Skills.  I decided that since a Shaman was adept in all things "Spirit Based," that he should, by virtue of being a Shaman, be able to "manipulate" spirit magic the way a Sorcerer could manipulate his spells (ie change range, area of effect, number of targets and duration).  Intensity was still bound by the number of points of the spell he memorized.  This power was EXCLUSIVE to the Shaman (for game balance) but manipulating spells required massive amounts of POW to succeed.  The Rune Tree has given me a way to balance the need to have a POW requirement (to prevent game-breaking magical displays) with the desire to provide higher skilled magic users with more impressive magics.  I can use the Rune Tree and its ratings to limit the input of POW into larger magics.  By allowing the player to initially favor one Rune Affiliation over another.  I think I will allow the Player to "Influence" his Rune Affiliations by up to his POW.  If two opposed Runes start at 50% EACH (in balance) the player with a 12 POW could make one Rune 62% while the other becomes 38%.  MRQ1 already listed Rune Affiliations for Spirit Magic Spells so I can use those to reduce the effectiveness of the Shaman casting spells where his Rune Affiliation % is low and give him a boost if the Affiliation is high.  This will allow some magic to be powerful but other magic must suffer (because Rune Affiliations are "inverse"), that's "built in balance."

Now what's "good for the goose, is good for the gander."   I can give Sorcerers the same boost based on Rune Affiliation.  I long since dropped the "Free INT" restriction as being too limiting on Sorcerers.  I needed another way to limit them.  I used POW expended in casting to do this.  Sorcerers can get around this using TAP or through the creation of POW Matrixes though.  The Rune Tree gives me the tool for limiting Sorcerers by using Rune Affiliations to limit the amount of POW they can put into a spell as well as allowing weaker Sorcerers to live to become powerful by providing them a boost to their manipulation.  This boost comes by expending Magic Points to generate "phantom POW/Magic Points" from the Affiliation.  For each point of POW (actually Magic Points) a Sorcerer expends, he gets a number of POW/MP to "manipulate" his spell.  This number is determined by the Spell he is casting's Rune Affiliation (percentage).  The same Rune Affiliation LIMITS the number of POW/MP the caster can invest to create those MPs he uses manipulating the spell (the built in "buffer" to prevent spells that destroy whole towns).

For example,  A mage has a Magic Rune Affiliation of 65% and his SPELL (each spell has its own affiliation) has a Power Rune Affiliation of 50%.  He can invest up to 7 MPs (for the Magic Affiliation) to manipulate the spell.  The Spell's MAXIMUM Intensity (the number of damage dice it does, STR of an illusion, etc...) is based on the DIFFERENCE between his actual Spell Casting SKILL and his roll (ie a Resist Damage spell that is 40% under the needed roll would resist 4 points of damage).  Intensity costs 1 MP (leaving him 6) and he can "bump" intensity by expending more POW (ie 2 POW nets 8 points of damage resistance).  Now he wants to manipulate the spell.  Each MP he invests generates a number of "Manipulation MPs" equal to the Affiliations Rating/10 (50%/10=5).  Thus if he spent 2 MP on Intensity, he would have 5 left to manipulate the spell.  He is limited in his manipulations by either his Magic Affiliation (7 max MP) or his Rune Affiliation (5 max MP) BUT he MULTIPLIES his remaining 5 MP by the Rune Affiliation (5) to determine the TOTAL NUMBER OF POW POINTS he can manipulate the spell by.  If he put all 5 MP into manipulations (25 total POW to use for 5 MP) he can spread them among Duration, Range, Targets, and Magnitude (spell resistance) as he sees fit.  He just cannot put more than 5 points into any SINGLE Manipulation.  Of course, at 7 MP expended, this would be an expensive spell to cast.  He could cast the spell with just 2 POW expended.  In this case, he would use 1 POW to get the Spell's Intensity and the other point could be used to manipulate the Spell.  In this case, that 1 POW would give 5 MP worth of "manipulation points" to spend.

I know this sounds complicated, but it is actually faster than RQ3's Sorcery was.

On 4/2/2017 at 4:12 PM, TRose said:

 As far as damage bonus due to strength plus size    goes , I prefer the RQ6/Mythras system . A Large troll with a size and strength of 30 doing a plus 1d10 is dangerous but under say  Magic World a 3d6 damage bonus  means  any hit has a good chance of instant death. 

 

I agree that the Damage Bonuses for STR need some attention.  This is an area where Jason (one of my "combat vets") has called BS on the system.  He questioned why the STR bonus for a short sword is the same as a bonus for a great sword.  The short sword has a weight of around 1 kg and a typical Claymore or lighter Zweihander easily goes 2.5 to 3 kg. With a fighter's strength being the same, the Claymore would require more STR to put into motion and would be moving slower.  This reduces its Energy (being determined by Momentum, which is Mass X Velocity).  It weighs more, but would not have the same bonus for STR in the real world.  

I have considered his argument, and I see an alternative.  I think every weapon should have a minimum STR, DEX, and SIZ to use.  The Damage Bonus could be based on the "Surplus STR points" the user has beyond the STR requirements to use the weapon.  These surplus STR points could be divided by a "weapon factor" to create "Damage units," with each unit being 1 point of bonus damage.  So a chart could look like this:

1 Unit = +1 Dam

2 Units = +1d2 Dam

3 Units = +1d3 Dam

4 Units = +1d4 Dam

5 Units = +1D5 Dam

6 Units = +1D6 Dam

and so on....

Integrating SIZ.  For every 10 SIZ points over the Minimum SIZ requirement of the weapon, add 1 point to the user's SURPLUS STR for calculating the damage bonus.

Weapon Factors:  I would list a given weapon's "Weapon Factor" in parentheses after its Listed Damage.  I'm guessing larger weapons (with more weight) would have SMALLER Weapon Factors while a smaller weapon would have a LARGER divisor/weapon factor.  I was thinking that a range from 2 (for mauls, great swords, etc...) to 10 (for pen knives) would be appropriate.  I really haven't chewed on this idea much.  Maybe the mathematicians in the forum could examine this idea and render an opinion?