icebrand

The languages were in rq2 (classic) and also un AHs "gloranthan bestiary" -probably the best feature in the book- I don't know how complete they are (for me the RQ2, same as everything else, is 100% complete and canon and theres nothing else out there #kiss)

Indeed! Whats up Vile? much obliged! Do you know why ducks go humakti? *NO ONE ELSE WILL TAKE THEM* (drumroll)

Hi! Long time RQ3 GM, just about to start GMing an RQ classic game I tried to google/search rules but if i'm correct a 2D6+6 characteristic roll would have a maximum of 18 (maximum rolled) +2 (number of dice) = 20, vs a 21 max with 3D6. Unless i'm mistaken and the +6 counts as a +1 ? if so, a +10 would still be a +1 or a +2? For example, is a duck's maximum STR (2d6+1) 15 or 16? Hope someone can clarify! Cheers, Alex

i think the most raw approach is that it takes time (same with axe trance and similar spells) since there isnt a single instance in the game when MP spent are instant, AFAIK. Also, we always ignored shield / countermagic / resists when casting "buffs" and heals, but that was a rule oversight that ramps the power of shield (it was by far the most widely prayed for spell in the campaign). Shield already gives 4 spirit points per divine point (as opposed to pretty much every other spell that gives 2) and that is balanced by having to spend more time powering beneficial spells to go through it.

After 15+ years of GMing RQ, i still have a pretty stupid question -- Does Heal Wounds (the divine spell) add SR to cast the spell based on the MP spent? Is it instant? We always used it as an instant cast (because my players complained about it not being any better than spirit healing), but it has a higher cast chance, and it can be cast as high as you want (considering you have the MP for it) and has a slightly better chance (+2) to go past your target's countermagic, so i decided it takes time. How do you play it?

I re-uploaded the 1st edition: RetroQuest 1st Ed - Downloads - Basic Roleplaying Central Sadly, the magic book and 2nd edition changes (mostly getting rid of the resistance table for Characteristic x5 tests as opposed rolls) are forever lost =)

Ok, this is the deal; i want to run a MODERN rq6 campaign; players will be normal modern people, and there will be sorcery/shamanism-y stuffs (think unknown armies at street level). the game is super gritty, and fits the genre better than my other go-to system (oddly enough, im running glorantha with savage worlds). What i'm missing is "cultures". Since pretty much everyone will be from the same culture (doh!) i'm thinking maybe use "social class" as culture, since a low class member of society probably has a completely different skillset than a middle (i.e: no driving!) or upper class! So, maybe those 3 "cultures" is the way to go. Also, im ditching starting money for a wealth rating (seriously, its easier to figure what you can and can't have according to your profession). I may also need new/revised professions (crap, this will be a TON of work, maybe rip off the BGB?) and updated skills (literacy needs tweaking, computers, and a few skill renaming here and there). Any ideas on where i can start stealing errr... getting inspirational material? I would TOTALLY buy a modern RQ6 sourcebook!

Sounds like a TRULY awesome game! Thumbs up!

Sounds awesome!!! BTW, im curious, how did you gen the characters? Did they have minimum skill requirements (like investigation, firearms, etc?)

Talk to the players beforehand and make sure they generate characters that actually go with the campaign?

On our last draft of house rules we used just two weapons: "melee" and "war" where melee did 1D6+DB and war did 2D6+db (a dagger, club, pole, hatchet, etc is a melee weapon, and a war sword, spear, mace, battle axe etc is a war weapon). Two handed weapons do +1 damage I think there ARE better weapons than others (the weapons people used to war with are better than civilian weapons, you don't see armies with daggers as main weapons!) and thats why we have two damages. As for the prowess thing, we are working at a "static" defense (-% to hit) to eliminate multiple rolls on combat.

Actually, there are "superior" (i.e: more effective) training methods than others; it is not only dependant on individuals. That's why there are dominant styles in mma. For example, boxing is superior to pretty much everything else for punching people!

Erm, i thought it was pretty clear i consider boxing, wrestling, etc as "martial arts". Lets "run" the numbers RQ-wise, ok? A "brawler" starts with 25%+Mod, and fights how many times a year? Thats x points worth of checks. A "boxer" starts with 25%+Mod, trains (if he's anywhere near serious, lets say 12hrs a week, bare minimum) + fights (sparring) + fights (matches). He also does a ton of physical conditioning. Now, you are saying that the brawler is somewhat better and/or has a significant chance to win? Mind you, if the brawler does train/condition, then i'd consider it as another martial art...

Well, i guess i have too little experience then, having never being actually shot at (the worst i got was getting pistol-whipped). I guess i have little experience *shrugs*. Every streetfight ive been, or people that trained with me have, was a non issue (unless they were many vs. 1); i guess the "streetfighter subculture" must really love what they do, since they could... i don't know, get into a boxing ring and earn millions?

Do you have experience in full contact fights? It doesn't really sound like it. You do not learn certain things by experience, it simply does not happen. Lets say the techniques are how the chess pieces move, and the "unpredictability" comes from strategy. There are certain CORRECT ways to throw a punch (that vary slightly from style to style) and there are INCORRECT ways to do it (that basically cause less damage and/or hurt yourself). Those subcultures you talk about *DO* train martial arts (or contact sports). Sensei and stuff is completely irrelevant; if someone teaches you how to fight (boxing, kick boxing, muay thai, or WHATEVER) you are trained. Also, of course one punch can end a fight, but most times it does not. You really need to be really really really *very* lucky to knockout someone who knows what hes doing with one punch.

I can't think any reason a brawler would learn how to, lets say, perform a falling step (basic boxing). How does this brawler learn how to walk, position, when to attack, when not to, etc? Also, please define street brawler. A guy with NO training that what? Fights on the street? Why? How often? Really, this seems out of a movie!

I never, ever, saw an "experienced but untrained" person that fought well. Sure, that person will win vs. an untrained and inexperienced one, and can also kick a poorly trained people, but against a serious martial artist, i doubt it. And pretty much thats why you don't see hobos winning many boxing / mma contests.

I do =) It is perfectly possible that a karate black belt (or anyone really) loses a "street brawl", but a REAL karate black belt (aka: full contact styles, like kyokushin or uechi ryu) losing vs. an untrained opponent would be a really weird thing. A "mc dojo" black belt? sure, probably anyone can take him since he doesnt actually learn to fight =)

Martial arts rules are fine for striking, though they don't have a correspondence on how stuff works irl. Grappling rules are ok for untrained grapplers, but they need to work with martial arts!

I find the separation between "brawling" and "martial arts" unnecessary/superfluous rules-wise. Really, i can't see why its even there, and any rationalization should be applicable to weapons as well. Striking-Wise, martial arts are as effective as their training is. It all comes down to how much contact there is. If you pit a boxer with 3 yrs training vs. someone who did 20 yrs of katas or sport (point-based) karate, im sory but im putting my money on the boxer every day. If the martial arts training itself has no contact, i.e. they dont actually HIT each other, its way less effective. Thats why serious self-defense courses do not teach you how to fight, but how to predict dangerous situations and avoid putting yourself there to start with.

Well, actually the "martial arts" skill is kind of... Wrong! From personal experience: If brawling represent a non trained combatant throwing punches, then i wouldn't let grapple go past 25 or maybe 50% without martial arts. People without grappling training really don't have a clue, and even a novice grappler can defeat a heavier, stronger opponent without much problem, even if such opponent has training in other martial arts. Just my 2 bolgs!

i think you can/should be able to put skill points on spells if you are using magic!

I don't use armor penalties, too much granularity for my taste! But if i did, it would probably be a static penality (like -1 to the "dex*x" & "con*x", and -xx% to dodge)

There are quite a few vids on youtube of people doing athletic feats on plate armor!