• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


SDLeary last won the day on October 21 2016

SDLeary had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

182 Excellent

1 Follower

About SDLeary

  • Rank
    Senior Member


  • Location
    SF Bay Area
  1. never mind
  2. Who wrote that? I don't think I remember ever playing it that way. SDLeary
  3. You could alter the bonus/penalty, but I wouldn't, at least under normal circumstances. I would, however, alter the footman's penalty depending upon how they were armed. Armed with a normal spear (or pole arm of similar length), I would reduce the penalty to -10%; with a 2-H spear or long pole arm, negate it completely. If a footman is facing off with a cavalryman alone, and armed with a pike, then I would increase the penalty back to -20%. The reason being that the pike is NOT a melee weapon, it is a battle/formation weapon. I would also reduce the cavalryman's bonus to +10%, because the point of the pike is still an obstacle (or perhaps force a DEX or Ride roll to get around and close). SDLeary
  4. I like well packed product more than anyone! But... Did anyone else feel like they had stumbled upon some evil Russian nested doll ritual as they unpacked their Quickstart? SDLeary
  5. I would actually choose the second... and tie it to the second of the old Location choice rules.... but instead of a +/- 1 bonus for delaying, a bonus for every X% under what was needed? Or due to the nature of firearms (chemical propelled), perhaps they don't do extra dice of damage (impale damage) for extra levels of success... Perhaps you get a +/- 1 location for a special, and max damage and up to a +/- 2 location on a critical. Or some variation of this if you want extra levels of success. SDLeary
  6. quicktstart

    I remember someone talking about this a while ago... don't remember who. Something about trying to minimize the downward spiral that occurs once someone looses points in an MP vs. MP contest. And yes, different magic will use different target Stats. Some will target MP, some will target POW, depending upon the nature and source of the spell. SDLeary
  7. Chaosium was responsible for the rules, and SR here is an evolution of RQ2. To the best of my knowledge, there were NO rule modifications due to requests from AH. SDLeary
  8. Some parries deflect, some parries block; the point is taken though about AP or HP being the determiner of how much is being parried by a weapon (as opposed to a shield). And while shields do stand up to abuse better than flesh, I think the ablative nature in RQ3 was the best. It sounds like that is what will be used in the final RQ:G rules. I think this works too for bronze (and lesser iron as well) weapons, because of the nature of the metal. Steel, we need something else though, and I'm not sure what that is. The problem with softer armor that deforms, is that deformity... that could impact the wearer causing damage. It does lessen whats getting through though. SDLeary
  9. It really depends on what you are defining as Japan, or Japanese.... Yayoi infantry used shields; and its less clear, but so may Asuka and Nara. Even once we get to what we consider the traditional samurai, the main form of defense still seems to be parrying. SDLeary
  10. Did you try to factor in Critical/Fumble chances? Using the resistance table, this would only apply to the active roller. In an opposed roll you have much more "interesting" possibilities should one participant critical and one fumble. SDLeary
  11. Bwa ha ha ha ha! Good luck!
  12. Fair enough. I've been one of those that in the past has forgotten such bonuses. The thing with Shields just feels wrong though. Perhaps on a Critical parry with a shield only. Seems like my first house rule, and I don't have the QS rules yet! ;-) SDLeary
  13. This seems odd for shields, and for parrying weapons other than swords, shod-shafted, or metal weapons (though it might be difficult to define these in-game, I will admit). Might I suggest a simple bonus on the next action for situations like these; i.e.. the Special or Critical parry over a Normal Attack puts the "defender" in a better "attack" position during their next action. I would suggest this for a "better than attack level success" for dodge as well. SDLeary
  14. Well, they carried multiple weapons. Some were designed to go after peers with the same level of protection, such as pollaxe and hammers, and something more anti-personnel (for lesser armored opponents) such as swords and axes. No, but you could allow a parry for thrown weapons, and a "defensive bonus" for missiles. For example, a medium shield perhaps a 15% "defense", in the sense of the term from RQ2. If the missile would have hit, save for the bonus, then the missile hits the shield. Perhaps. Its also possible that I'm remembering previous discussions from here. SDLeary
  15. Or RQ3 where weapons and shields got damaged as well, but it took time. It wasn't that it would get through the shield too... more along the lines of "it can't get thru the armor, so why worry AND I can carry this big ass weapon that will deal more damage to my opponents men-at-arms." In other words, it became something of a nuisance. I would go more for parry thrown weapons and block missiles, ala RQ3. Wasn't there errata that said you could, as a Shield is a weapon? Yes, and this is a big advantage against multiple opponents. SDLeary