Barak Shathur

16 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

 becomes a normal hit for 1D8+1+1d4 (average 8 ) that bounces harmlessly off the shield.

No, that’s not how it works. A normal parry reduces a special hit to a normal hit that however bypasses the shield, striking the defendant.

16 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

doing damage equal to someone's SIZ in RQ3 is tough. The average guy with a sword does 1D8+1+1d4 and the average SIZ is 13

Which is as it should be. It’s not easy to knock someone over with a one handed weapon. With a great weapon though it’s a different matter. 

16 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Actually it means far fewer blows will get through. An impaling hit that would have does 2d8+2+1d4 (average 13.5) and gotten something past a shield, reducing the shield a point, and maybe hitting an unarmored area

Impaling weapons yes, maybe. Blunt and edged weapons not so much. 

16 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Depends on if you are attacking the opponent or his shield. 

What does this mean? Why would you attack someone’s shield?

I just prefer the RQ system, where you roll damage and whatever exceeds the shield's AP passes on to the defender. Of course, this won't have much of an effect with BRP:s weapons and shields which have APs in the 15-25 range, but it works in RQ where AP lies more around 10-12 on average. But barring that, your system makes sense.

2 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Yeah, RQ3 knockback rule was something of a mixed blessing. Under the right circumstances, light fighting along a wall or cliff,  it could be devastating, otherwise not so much. I think Pendragon's knockdown rule might be more useful. Instead of being knocked back the target has to make a DEX roll or fall down, dropping his weapon. 

In RQ3, you also have to roll DEX x 5 or fall down.

2 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Since RQ3 critical hits did max damage and bypassed worn armor,  and impales did double damage, most specials and crits did slip past a normal block. And since in RQ3 parries against unsuccessful attacks damage the attacking weapon, you get similar results to the BGB matrix.

With a typical shield having 12 AP, even most criticals would not get through (unless you're a huge monster or using a two handed weapon). A critical impale might, but  criticals don't happen as often as specials. So I disagree. Turning specials into a regular hit means that many more blows will get through and have a chance of damaging the opponent, thus reducing the ping pong effect. And it just feels better when a special has some kind of impact rather than just bouncing off a shield like a regular blow.

3 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

BTW, you may want to be careful about using the reposte option for multiple parries, as RQ has special rules for splitting skills over 100%. It can kinda get wild, especially with RQ magic. 

What is the riposte rule? I can't find anything about it in BGB. 

For full disclosure I use RQ3 in a MERP conversion game, where I also use the magic system from the BRP MERP fan edit from this site. Overall, it works pretty smoothly. Converting NPCs is not that bad, except for MERP's spell lists. There I try to find equivalencies for the actual spells available to each character, but it's a bit of a headache.

So I recently (about a year ago, I'm a returning roleplayer who played mostly MERP and WFRP back in the day) discovered RuneQuest 3 and I found it really striking somehow. It has almost just the right balance between simulationism and playability. There's so much to love. The relative impact of abilities on skills. The way Size is primarily related to weight, not height (which makes sense since mass would seem to have more impact on HP and DB than height). The breadth of skills, for example separating Fast talk from Oratory, or Search from Scan...what a cool and original concept! The combat system, realistic yet simple, with enough little wrinkles such as impale and knockback to make it a little more dynamic than just ping pong. I even like fatigue system! And the idea of hard and flexible armour with different properties...I could go on. These are just details but they have a certain flavour and texture to them that seems just right. Sure, a lot of it comes from previous versions but it all seems to fit together in a way that feels thought through somehow.

Except that some things don't. So the game I'm running now is based on RQ3, but I cherry pick some goodies from BGB. I get the best of both worlds. So this is how I hack RQ3:

The special effect for non impaling weapons in RQ3 being simply knockback, but at a lower damage threshold than for regular knockback, seems unbelievably unimaginative (not to mention contradicting the basic weapon knockback where it occurs if a blow causes more damage than the target's Size). So I imported the special effects from BGB. Big improvement!

Being only able to parry one opponent makes combat against several foes practically suicidal. This really limits the possibilities of the game, so I imported the rule where you can parry more than once in a round, but at a cumulative -30% for each attempt beyond the first. On the other hand, I don't like that in BGB, parrying is "all or nothing", no damage gets through. What if a buckler parries a greatsword? Or a troll's maul? Here I much prefer RQ3.

I love the attack-defence matrix in BGB. Much better if a special or critical can get past a normal block, only reduced in potency. Speeds up fights considerably and gives an edge to higher skill since it occurs more frequently. So I use this.

I like BGB:s fate points. I've seen too many campaigns flounder because a key character got killed by an unlucky roll. With fate points, you'll dodge that bullet, but if you expose yourself to risk excessively your luck will run out. 

I also like the complementary skill bonus, so I use that.

So what would you do to tweak RQ3, and how does it compare to BGB?

This is taking a turn for the better, we're starting to discuss RQ3 now! It's my favourite version too. I'm starting a new thread.

Quote

Exacept that the impale chance has nothing to do with the armor worn. Thus your just as likely to have an arrow find a gap in plate as it is to piece mail, or even padding. Arrows are far more effective against plate in RQ than they were histoically.

I have always felt uncomfortable with arrows doing impale damage. It makes more sense with a heavy weapon such as a spear or sword (or even a dagger) that would destroy more on its way through a body, but an arrow having such a narrow point doesn't seem to be in the same class IMO. It's a weakness of the system.

Quote

It's an okay solution. But your arguments that full mail plus coat of plates protects as well as plate and is signdicantly heavier just doesn't hold up. Plate does protect better, and the weight is about the same. 

Just consider the evolution. If it were about weight and cost, then for over a century plate was a failure. The whole evolution of armor with more and more plate being added to and replacing mail was becuase plate provided superior protection. 

You've got me confused with someone else. I never claimed any such thing, nor would I.

Quote

Sorry but I disagree. The whole point of a warhammer was to concentrate the are of impace so as to be able to penetrate plate. Padding is probably the best or second best armor to wear against blunt trauma. 

Sorry, but you'll never convince me that e.g the pourpoint of Charled de Blois (or the gambesons depicted in the Maciejowski bible) would do much against a solid blow from a warhammer. If by gambeson you mean that really stiff layered material that the youtube crossbow guy used to test bolts and arrows on, maybe you have a point (no pun intended), But that's more like a linothorax and not what most people mean by padding. That stuff would not qualify as "flexible armour" as per RuneQuest or BRP.

4 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

It's not that good. Padding is rather effective against blunt weapons. but is flexible.

 

But doesn't account for what type of armor you are hitting at all. Plate if much more resistant to being pieced than mail, scale or pretty much any other medieval/ancient armor. So much so that most impaling weapons won't penetrate it. If you really want to be more realistic, most such weapons will bounce off the plate. 

 

On your first point, I would have to disagree. It is a good solution for this level of abstraction. It doesn’t encumber the system with extra data points, like separate armour values for different types of weapons, or slow down play. And padding on its own isn’t all that effective against a heavy smashing weapon that concentrates force on a small point, like a mace or a warhammer. It’s under heavier, more rigid armour that spreads out the impact that it really comes into its own. 

Regarding plate, sure, not much would penetrate it head on but a point is more likely to find a weak spot or a gap in the armour than other weapons, so the impale works a decent representation of this.

Again, playability is a big factor here. Harnmaster is perhaps more realistic, but the armour system with all the layering, five different armour values (more in HM1) and 26 hit locations (more if you divide up the face too) will give you grey hairs (unless you have them already 😄)

I stand corrected then. Having only played RQ3 apart from BGB in the english language BRP-family, that was my assumption. My bad.

Still, I think the RQ3 rules for blunt and pointed weapons is a fairly simple and un-clunky solution to the topic at hand.

Just now, Kloster said:

In fact, BRP derives from RQ2, and RQ3 derives from RQ2/BRP. But the rest of your point is perfectly correct.

Sorry, I should have been more clear. I was assuming that we are talking about the Big Gold Book, which is essentially RQ3 in its core mechanics, plus some niceties from other BRP-games.

RQ3 (which forms the basis of BRP) has a pretty good solution: flexible armour protects at half value against blunt weapons. And then you have impale, which accounts for point attacks. 

If not that, I would take a page from Harn with separate armour values for edge, blunt and point. 

On 3/23/2021 at 1:09 AM, Shams said:

BRP combat & damage bonus were intended to be a bit more like real-life combat than the cartoony combat style of other roleplaying games. The same goes for Pendragon, or any other of the mainstream Chaosium games. Sword fights or gun battles really are deadly. Armor works and you really do want to be wearing some. Like in real life, a serious fight against a normal human can be over very quickly, and you don't spend countless rounds whittling down your mundane, unarmored opponent. Mind you, that was the design philosophy back when I worked there, although I haven't followed the later editions too closely.

This is one of the qualities I love about the BRP systems. What I don't love is that arms and legs fly off a little to easily.  I solved it by simply halving the db die, it hits the sweet spot for me. Also the fact that combat lasts a little longer means that fatigue points come more into play. Thanks for sharing!

6 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Yeah, joints are weak spots, the underarms are a big target especially if in plate. ,Just wondering but did your padding extend to your elbows? 

Minimum standard for the SCA is "rigid material" plus padding, and we always used 1.5 mm steel cops. So yes, I had padding there but that in itself would never have sufficed for the kind of full contact sparring we did. For example, when I started back in the 80s, I and many others wore hockey gloves (the horror) for hand protection, and every now and then someone had a broken hand or finger from an unlucky hit (you're not allowed to intentionally target the hands).

2 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

I doubt it. Mail and Gambeson soak up a lot of impact. Telling strokes tend to be on exposed areas and weakpoints. Most strikes tend to be partially defelcted or glacing blows rather than good solid hits.When I used to do it, most of the strikes that we felt were on the hands -the opponent's weapon would tend to slide down the blade and clip the knuckles. It usually didn't do any real damage, but did lead to people dropping their weapons and being exposed.Toss a shield into the mix and a solid hit becomes very unlikely. 

Remember, if mail didn't work it wouldn't have been used for so long. 

 

We can agree to disagree on this one. As for me, I'd hate to think what would have happened to my elbows if I hadn't been wearing steel cops (not to mention fingers, we used basket hilts thankfully). However, some thoughts, since we're deep into historical speculation (which is a risky business):

1. Mail over gambeson obviously *was* effective for the kinds of situations it was designed to be used in, that is confused melees, preferably mounted against poorly armed peasant levies (if we're talking the High Medieval period), where it's hard to get a good shot in, not SCA type duels on foot or tunnel fighting during dungeon crawls. So I agree with you on this point. 

2. It's also possible they wore rigid protection under the mail. That kind of thing wouldn't show in the illuminations, but there are hauberks depicted in the Bayeux Tapestry that show a square patch on the chest which is sometimes interpreted as a reinforcement (although I think the most common explanation is as a kind of aventail. 

3. That crossbow video is fun! It's interesting that his gambeson/aketon samples are so stiff, much more so than the gambesons I've seen and worn. I guess that's what you might get if you have 20-30 layers of linen with wadding, sort like a padded linothorax. That plus mail would certainly be effective (if a bit inflexible to move in). Still, those knees and elbows, man...

14 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

The typical sword strike against a man in mail and aketon is probably going to bounce off harmlessly. At least until some of the mail links give way.

Having done SCA fighting in mail and (thick) gambeson, I would have to disagree (and we only use rattan "swords"). A hard blow on a bony part of the body (joints, clavicle, hip bone, ribs) would probably break something, even if the mail wasn't penetrated.

“Maille” is the historically correct term. Mail armour would perhaps be a useful modern equivalent, to separate it from stuff you get from the postman 😄

The word “chainmail” is a more recent invention. Some fun facts are to be found on Wikipedia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chain_mail

38 minutes ago, RosenMcStern said:

BRP covers historical play, too. Real armour should be present in all its forms. Fantasy armour should be an addition, not a replacement for real amouur. The limited weight/cost, 5-point protection niche in real world was taken by mail shirts that provided partial cover but good protection from slashes. Their stats are probably similar to that of the non-historical ringmail.
 

I was referring exactly to this. It's not that hard to simulate: you don't allow mail without padding, as it happens in 90% of RPGs with a minimum of historical verisimilitude. There is no need to punish players for choosing options that do not make sense: just remove the unrealistic options and you are fine.

My personal taste is for historical simulation, for sure. So let's say BRP's 5 pt "ring mail" corresponds to regular historical "maille" and it includes 2 pts of heavy padding, which can be worn with mail without penalties for layering. Take out the padding and you have 3 pt mail armour. I don't think the weight is right (if 1 ENC = 1 kg then 10 kg for a full suit minus coif is about half of what real mail weighs), but because of its extreme flexibilty and the way it hangs on the body it *could* be argued as being less encumbering than stiffer armour of similar weight.  This would also partially account for its historical popularity (in addition to the relative lack of skill needed to produce it). The same would apply to the 7 pt "chain" in BRP, which I will interpret as reinforced or 6 to 1-ring "thick" mail.

5 hours ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

Just for fun....

 

That's what we're here for 😄

5 hours ago, SDLeary said:

A Gambeson and an Arming Doublet/Aketon/Subarmalis is different. Same type of garment (quilted/layered fabric), but the Gambeson is much heavier weight, designed as protection as opposed to an Aketon which is padding for your armor. Or, perhaps a better way to look at it is there are different weights of Gambeson that serve different needs.

SDLeary

BRP covers for this with regular (1pt) and heavy (2pts) padded/quilted armour.

4 hours ago, RosenMcStern said:

Ring mail did not exist, this is the point. It is ring that should be made redundant and replace with th eubiquitous chain skirt.

And the values for mail must always include the padding. You cannot wear chain without padding. It would do more damage than it blocks. Realistic value is 5 INCLUDING the quilt.

I really cannot undestand why Steve Perrin, who has some experience with armour, chose this unrealistic value for chain.

But we're talking about a fantasy world where ring mail does exist, not some given (presumably European) medieval period in our world.

I 100% disagree that mail without padding would do more damage than it blocks, although most of its efficiency would be lost. It would still protect against cuts, and I have done a lot of fighting in mail in the SCA and found that having a kind of heavy curtain swinging about your body sometimes protects a bit against concussive impact (although again not much without a gambeson). If you're referring to rings being driven into the flesh, sure that's bad, but that kind of granularity is hard so simulate in a system that's supposed to have a kind of simplicity and elegance such as BRP. 

But I agree that on the 8 grade scale, 5 might be good for mail. Maybe BRP's 7 pt mail could be thought of as a kind of 'double mail', with 6 to 1-ring pattern instead of 4 to 1. Or reinforced in some other way. Like char aina maybe. 

45 minutes ago, RosenMcStern said:

Gambeson 5 and chain 6 is lightyears away from reality. Chain was ALWAYS worn on a gambeson/silk/linen, so having it increase protection by 20% only makes no sense, for the weight it adds. Gambeson/aketton is the equivalent of what we used to call "leather armour" (which probably did not exist in real history. it should be 

Chain should be around 4-5, and was standard issue for medieval professional militia or ancient soldiers, often worn only on the torso. Between this and the full protection of the gothic plate there should be 4 steps at least, with room for scale, lamellar and brigandine, all of which have different characteristics and protection values.

I agree 100%. However, like I said I'm trying to keep it as close as possible to the rulebook. One solution might be to say that 7pt mail includes the 2pt heavy quilt. In order to not make mail redundant vs ring mail (5 pts) you could say that mail is the only armour that allows heavy quilt without additional armour penalties. Which I think makes sense since it's the most flexible of armours. EDIT: I think this also seems historically accurate, the gambesons in the Maciejowski Bible under mail look pretty thick. I have the impression that padding under gothic plate tended to be thinner. 14th century pourpoints might be an exception though. Anyway.

The best representation of medieval armour I've come across is in Harnmaster.

On a related note, for roleplaying purposes, at what point could one consider an edged or piercing weapon having penetrated armour (as opposed to causing a bruise/concussive impact)? I’m thinking if the damage exceeds the armour value by 50%, the blade/point is through. 

EDIT: I guess it would have technical relevance in cases of diseased or poisoned attacks. 

I see. I use hit locations so that part didn’t compute for me. 

If I was to fiddle a little more with the system, I’d would have gambeson correspond to ”heavy clothing”, and let it be the only kind of armour you could wear as an extra layer without penalty. But my philosophy is to alter as little as possible, it’s such a slippery slope...

I like it! What does the number in brackets signify?

A little time to kill on my hands so throwing this out for reflection: I disagree with chainmail being just one step away from plate in terms of protection (7 vs 8 pts protection on an 8 pt scale) in BRP, I think lamellar (6 pts) being kind of semi plate armour should be in between, so I switch mail and lamellar in terms of protection, weight and price. Thoughts?