icebrand

alejandro.hart@gmail.com for google +

http://twitter.com/#!/ale_hart (follow me! i've dinosaurs!!!)

http://www.facebook.com/alejandro.hart

Yes, and that's why I suggested a limit on actions/attacks.

It could be a limitation to 1 action per round, a -25% malus per action over the first, or anything else.

Simply said, a standard round of action for a 3 CA character would be 1 attack and 2 parries.

Please explain why someone has to be able to hold off many people at once. In real life, anyone has a very hard time fighting two people, and 3 vs 1 is almost always a guaranteed win for the 3. 4 or 5 vs. 1 is "run or die".

I don't see why you cant just pit a party vs. a party instead of 4 people against a superior opponent. Big, mythical creatures already have a ton of HP and high armor.

With 3 players, it could take 5 hits or more all to the same location, that's way worse than RQ3 which would only be 2 hits if it parries one.

On RQ3 3 players attacking a single opponent would all attack twice (even if the 2nd attack is a punch) minus the one parrying, and then, they would all cast a spell or 2 at it.

I can see the problem that at the moment in MRQ2 when you outnumber an enemy, everyone gets 3 attacks and just about anything short of a giant or large dragon goes down in the first round.

Well, anyone outnumbering ANYTHING on RuneQuest was always that way; last night we were playtesting RetroQuest, and mooks with 75% (the lowest combat skill is 187% for my character!) kicked the crap out of it. They were about 20 vs 3 + some hirelings, we (i) fumbled our stealth roll and turned our ambush into an all out melee. It was very fun though!

On RQ it would have been way, way worse, since instead of -30% per parry you have to split, so preety much unless the monster has 500% skill it gets quite a few free strikes. Since MRQII is more survivable, i don't see how that could be a problem per se!

HA! I do the same thing, except it's 50/75/100 then +25%.

Haha, great minds...

Though i would never, EVER give a x5% penalty/bonus, all my modifiers for everything are +/-x0%, so you do substract/add only one time. If a gm gives me a 15% or 25% penalty/bonus, i would just punch him im the face, cut his head off and drink from his skull. (And hear the lamentations of his mother, since GM's rarely have women )

I like this houserule.

You may even need 30% for 2 CAs, for when you positively, absolutely need to shaft that stupid farmer!

I like Combat Actions. I have ported them to all my games.

On my MRQ table you need 60% for 3 CA, 90% for 4 CA and +30% for every extra CA, in addition to the INT/DEX requirements. Animals/Monsters get their full CA whatever their skill rating is.

Hmmm, I never had any problem with Chartered Accountants in Runequest ...

Combat actions. What actually bothers me is not the concept (it actually makes for very cool fights when heroes fight lowly peasants with less CA's, or terrifying monsters with many CA), but that it's purely stat-based, so if i have high INT and DEX, i get 3 combat actions even if its the first time in my life i pick up a weapon, and the grizzled veteran fighter has 2CA's because he has low stats.

It IS a rant an quite a minor issue, since im sure pretty much any grizzled veteran can easily manage an INT/DEX average of 13, but still...

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE

*whatever* you dont don't call it "runequest" or "runequest III". Runequest 6, Runequest VI, RQ 6, RQ 2012, RQ of the apes, but no more confusion. I *fucking hate*"RQ2" "which one?".

Also, get rid of CA's!!! =) =) [only thing that's missing on RQ2 for it to be the perfect RQ]

Fun skills from good old CoC, like "Baseball Cards", "lazy", "falling asleep", etc. But then, it would have distraced new players of BRP.

Meh, those were ripped off from old RQ2 (the real one) suplements!!!

Levels.

PS: Icebrand, even in your setting you could still use Allegiances for aethistic sorcerers. They would simply be acting according to their belief system, be it Zistorism, Nihilism, or whatever. Allegiances can describe concepts and philosophies, and don't necessarily need to be allied to Deities and such. Or thats how I read it.

I do like your descriptions of aethistic sorcerers, that is similar to how I envision their views in my setting, except they are definately the minority in Western lands, with Malkioni Clergy being the majority of western sorcerers.

Oh noes, that was the pov of *my* sorceress (black horse county, but kind of had to run away due to her husband being a real douche). Most malkionis in my settings do believe in god et all, thing is, as a gm, pre-heroquest, the invisible god didn't directly intervene, and akin to real life, no one could actually produce evidence of his existence (opposed to theists, that can call divine intervention, lose their powers if excommunicated, have heroquests, etc)

We mean max trainable/permanent attribute. Magic or Superpowers are not included.

Just wondering, but how often do characters actually hit the max? I recall Rune level characters in RQ2 maxing out stats fairly regularly, but since then it has rarely come up.

Well, in my group: originals in parenthesis)

Vilfrid (Orlanthi): STR 17 (12) [24 due to permanent magic] - CON 18 (14) - DEX 18 (14) - SIZ 20 (17)

Parkar (Humakti): STR 17 (8) - CON 17 (4) DEX 18 (12) - SIZ 16

Alsbo (Sorecerer): STR 14 (14) [28 due to permanent magic] - CON 17 (13) - DEX 16 (i dont recall the base) - SIZ 14

Avril (Sorceress): STR 9 - CON 18 (11) - DEX 18 (14) - SIZ 9

Of course, we don't limit stats on siz, we just plain don't like that. Current cap is max roll, the RQ 3 versions had quite a bit more stats

Gloranthan Sorcery is, by and large, religious in nature. You don't get many independant sorcerers and there are very few Sorcery Schools that don't have some kind of religious twist.

Sorcery seemed atheistic because RQ3 introduced Sorcery in a non-Gloranthan way.

Yes, of course it is, but there i used to see it as if there was no tangible result from worship; the invisible god could be anything you want; a god ruling all over creation, just another god, nothing, etc. You prayed, and the "only" thing you got was spiritual comfort for you and your community...

Then sandy introduced saints (that worked as limited divine interventions) but you could still argue that it was the sorcerer himself doing the stuff; then came HQ, and now sorcerers have divine intervention (miracles) too, "proving" the existence of their god/saints, and giving physical proof of their existence.

Not having "proof" of god and having to actually have faith was a big thing for me (it's actually preety stupid not having "faith" in a pagan god, you see their powers, they give you stuff, you can even go and shake their hand; you don't need any faith, they just exist!)

So, i wouldn't have used allegiance for sorcerers, since on my classical gloranthan setting, there is notting you can actually "ally" to; the saints are ideas and the invisible god is way beyond that!

I hate saints... They "theiced" sorcery... I want my sorceress as atheist as possible, if i wanted to do some fancy dances and hubba-hubbas i would have joined one of those pagan or heathen cults.

At least for my character, solace is not attained by grace of a god or saints, but by following a strict code of conduct that shapes reality enough so after death you become nothing instead of burning in hell (though there are pretty horses in hell). But don't get me started, or ill end up writing two pages about how sorcery spells are really nothing more than quantum mechanics equations given birth to reality by sheer power of will.

PS: i've 187% sword and an even higher spellcasting skill to convince any would-be inquisitors :P

If you are doing it, do it right =)

Just go for affinities for each particular god, i don't think you need to actually write them down; pretty much everyone should KNOW (or else!) whatever drops or raises their affinity! Also, it makes for excelent "heroes", you get initiate, lord-priest-devotee and lord/priest-champion-whatever HQ called them at 3 distinct affinity levels!

On downloads now!

http://basicroleplaying.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=418

Ok, here's the 1st edition of RetroQuest, ironed out and hopefully with less bugs. The game is based on GORE, but it's as light as possible while keeping a gritty (but still heroic) style. Includes the core rules for a simple fantasy game set in glorantha or any other world you like!!!

Highlights:

• Very simple D100 engine (7 classic stats, 3 attributes, 9 basic skills and 9 advanced skills!)

• Deadly and fast combat (no more endless parry!)

• Close to 0 bookkeeping (you need only track Hit Points!)

• Streamlined rules for a quick-paced game

Coming Soon:

• RetroQuest - Character Sheet

• RetroQuest - Magic Book (draft almost done)

• RetroQuest - Creatures Book (low priority, you can use any BRP/D100 creatures)

Ok, we were reviewing characteristic maximums (to tweak our RQ a bit) and i'd like some opinions

Maximum Roll: Whatever you can roll on maxed dice (2D6+6 = 18)

Max+Min: 2D6+6 = 18 + 8 = 24

Max+Min, plusses count as 1: 2D6+6 = 18+3 (the +6 counts as 1) = 21. 2D6+9 or 2D6+143 would still add +3 MIN

Max+Min, +6 counts 1: same as above, only a 2D6+9 would be +4 min, +21 would be +6 min, and so on

Im at -3 =( =( i would love to join otherwise

Hello,

anybody interested in participating a Rubble and Ruin online game? Timezone is AEST, more infos here:

FGII Forum

Whats AEST in GMT?

I think RetroQuest 1st ed (coming soon) is possessed by the devil, lets see:

- 7 Characteristics

- 3 Attributes

- 5 Stat Rolls

- 7 Basic Skills

- 3 Combat Skills

- 11 Advanced Skills

- 29 Weapons

- 7 Armors

Groovy eh?

OK, on second glance, that is also a possibility. Though both were designed cut and thrust, regardless of how they were actually used.

SDLeary

Liam neeson's sword is a broadsword / 1h claymore right?

Well, most rapiers did not have a sharp edge along the entire blade, and many

did not have a sharp edge at all, since a weapon designed for thrusting does

not need one, so grabbing the blade of a rapier was a quite common maneuver.

The sword in the movie is a "cut and thrust sword", not a true rapier! It would be actually safer to grab rob roy's sword!

At least rob gets cut many times!

Until someone grabs the blade...

I think "grabbing the blade" of a weapon like that is kind of a movie maneuver if you feel attached to your fingers =)

If you don't use the optional hit locations rule another way to house rule shields so that they benefit a character in a one on one combat is to have them work like a helm does (helms add 1 point to the characters armor value). The point costs could be:

Small Shield +1 AP

Medium Shield +2 AP

Large Shield +3 AP

This feels more abstract fits in well with the core rules for hit point totals and is certainly easier in play.

Realism fans would say that not all blows hit the shield, however the same could be said for the helm +1 AP bonus which IIRC is a core rule.

Retroquest uses +1AP for shield and +2AP for a big shield (one that can't be used on horseback).

Also, armors give AP based on material *and* cover (so a leather scale armor is 3 ap, a metal scale armor is 4 ap, a leather scale tunic is 4 ap and a metal scale tunic is 5 ap)

Ofc, hit locations are only used on major wounds.