Cultural weapon skills are a bit vague?

[Blindhamster]

27 minutes ago, lordabdul said:

As for the OPs (which, we should notice, haven't posted much since, maybe because the thread went on a big tangent right away... not super awesome), I had some similar questions when I did my first RQG characters. I agree that those bonuses, along with the character sheet, are quite confusing, but I really took the cultural weapon skill bonuses at their broadest. I figured, for example, that young Sartarites are exposed to all kinds of dagger techniques and one-handed spears, and that, as such, the listed bonuses applied to skill categories. Probably when they get a bit older they settle on a specific spear, for instance, and then spend their cult and personal points in that.

To be fair, I think we did answer the OPs question as best as possible, again based on both the rules written in the book and based on the FAQ threads that were shared.

 

Quote

Think it can be summarized as:

• skills are always for a specific weapon, if a weapon can be used in multiple ways (2 vs 1 hands, melee vs missile), its two separate skills.
• if a culture/rune/occupation gives a bonus to a weapon category, you must choose ONE weapon from that category.
• if a culture/rune/occupation gives a bonus to a weapon, it applies to all skills for that weapon
• any increases via customisation points or improvements during play must be against a specific skill for the specific weapon (if you use it 1 handed, increase that, if you throw a javeline, increase missile weapons javeline etc).

 

To me, the only real ambiguity is around the weapon categories with the same name as one of the weapons as its unclear if the intent is a bonus to the weapon of the name, or one of the weapons of the category.

 

To break that down some more, based off of the rulebook and the referenced FAQ comments:

Quote

skills are always for a specific weapon, if a weapon can be used in multiple ways (2 vs 1 hands, melee vs missile), its two separate skills.

this is based on:

On 2/1/2019 at 3:43 PM, Jason Durall said:

 

Quote

• There is no mention, in the Javelin description on p.211, of the Throwing Javelin skill, I would have expected the same comment as the above quote in that context. Does someone with a javelin use the same skill for both melee and throwing then?

Separate skills. 

Quote

• Axe, small: same comment. It refers to its use in both melee and as a hurled weapon, no mention of a separate skill. Axe, Throwing even refers back to Axe, Small.
• Spear, Long or Short: same thing.

Separate skills. 

Which makes it clear that when a weapon can be used in more than one way, they're distinct skills.

 

Then:

Quote

if a culture/rune/occupation gives a bonus to a weapon category, you must choose ONE weapon from that category.

This is based on the text on page 60 of core rulebook in reference to cultural weapons (which was the clear point of the topic, alongside the issue i acknowledged was still vague:

Quote

Where the listed skill is a broad category of weapons (such as 1H Axe), you should pick a weapon within that category (such as Battle Axe).

 

Finally:

Quote

• if a culture/rune/occupation gives a bonus to a weapon, it applies to all skills for that weapon
• any increases via customisation points or improvements during play must be against a specific skill for the specific weapon (if you use it 1 handed, increase that, if you throw a javeline, increase missile weapons javeline etc).

these are based on:

On 2/1/2019 at 3:43 PM, Jason Durall said:

Yes. It's not explicit, but when get a cultural or professional skill bonus to a starting weapon (such as a javelin) that can be thrown or used in hand-to-hand, you start with both at the same skill. If you add points to them while customizing your character, you should assign those points to one or the other. 

Which clearly covers when a weapon can be used for both melee and ranged. It feels totally reasonable to extrapolate out that the same should apply if the weapon can be used 1 or 2 handed.

But no, there is no real clarity on what to do when a weapon category and a specific weapon has the same name - personally I'd go with it being the specific weapon, but seeing as you specifically HAVE to pick just one weapon from a category I don't think it makes a huge difference either way.

The character sheet would just be MUCH better if it didn't list any weapons on there as half the confusion is caused by the official character sheet including categories on it.

Edited May 8, 2020 by Blindhamster

[Kloster]

1 hour ago, lordabdul said:

I understand that there is real-world/simulationist reasons to do it, but it's not for me, and a game designer has to draw the line somewhere.

Completely right. This is why I concluded my disagreement with Jeff by, roughly, "You are the author, and don't need other reason".

1 hour ago, lordabdul said:

I'm tempted to only use categories as skills (1H Sword, 2H Sword, 1H Axe, 2H Axe, etc.)

This is one of the reason I prefer RQ3's combat rules, in addition to

1 hour ago, lordabdul said:

adding optional maneuvers and movement in melee

 

[Orlanthatemyhamster]

21 hours ago, Shiningbrow said:

Have you actually read the latest iteration of Runequest???

Which bit?
The bit where other people shout at you because you don't agree with stuff or get things wrong, or the bits where you have a civilised discussion?
I skipped the first.
I always think more than one '?' is a sign of rudeness, and as bad as all capitals.

Yes, I saw that LM's can use Sorcery, But, yes, I also read the very first line in the sorcery Chapter, and I quote; "Sorcerers perceive an Impersonal Universe of Immutable laws". (my emphasis)
How does that fit in with a God (again my emphasis) of knowledge?
Oh I know it can, Illumination/Gbaji/Nysalor/Arkat et al, but please show me where the rational is for LM's ability to use sorcery in the open (in the book) and I'll bow to your superior knowledge. P389 mentions their ability to use it, but as far as rational goes, to put it mildly, it's walktapus dung. 

The attack and parry bit?

Yeah, a misreading on my part I admit, so, sorry I guess.

[Joerg]

16 minutes ago, Orlanthatemyhamster said:

I quote; "Sorcerers perceive an Impersonal Universe of Immutable laws". (my emphasis)
How does that fit in with a God (again my emphasis) of knowledge?

The gods are bound by their natures (the runes), although the wooing of and subsequent marriage to Ernalda shows that in the Godtime deities were able to explore aspects hitherto unknown, and heroes of a deity can still make such aspects accessible.

Lhankor Mhy is the god of all knowledge, and the knowledge about the sorcerers' perception of the world as impersonal, bound by immutable laws, is part of the knowledge the god has, and shares with his cult.

The Lhankor Mhy cultists' mindset is that of theists assigning personality to the forces of the world, but they can still learn and manipulate sorcers as if the impersonal view of the universe was applicable. That method creates results even if their mindset is less pure than that of the "atheists" or "worshipers of the Invisible God". These latter may have additional methods to broaden the range of their sorcery, unavailable to the LM cult because it comes from the personalized view. Another divide may exist between Hrestolism which accounts for Joy and henosis with the One Mind and ascension, and the Brithini and Rokari approach that only goes for emanations of the runes, in terms of methods to expand sorcery.

And then there's the Mostali world view, which is weirdly personal, too.

[GAZZA]

9 hours ago, Kloster said:

Completely right. This is why I concluded my disagreement with Jeff by, roughly, "You are the author, and don't need other reason".

Fair enough, but I am the GM, and I need a reason to use what the author has written. The author's job in an RPG supplement isn't to convince himself, but his audience - and this is a new iteration of an existing game, which has been deliberately targetted (using RQ2 mechanics!) at that audience, so it's a bit disgenuous to take a "because I say so!" stance.

In fairness I don't think this is the stance that Jeff has taken - he has an entire thread where we can ask questions about why decisions have been made. (Which is not to say that I find his reasoning at all convincing in many cases, but that's fine - I'm sure reasonable people can disagree, and nobody has suggested Jeff is going to barge into my roll 20 session and tell me I'm doing it wrong).

[GAZZA]

In RQ3, and I believe also in RQ2, there was a very good reason to carry a shield as well as a 1H weapon - a 1H weapon can't attack and parry in the same round. You want to use a 1H sword? You'd need something else to parry with. Didn't have to be a shield - you could dual wield like the emoist of Driz'zt fanboys if you liked - but you needed to use whatever was in your other hand to parry with.

I wonder if a similar rule in RQG would address any of these issues.

[Wookie]

It feels like it might be an editing issue - the writers know what they intended to say, so when they checked it, that's what they thought it said. We've come along afterwards and found multiple interpretations, which probably include the one meant by the writers, but we are uncertain as to which one that is. Between the character sheet and the cultural skills section, things are unclear; we can guess the intent, we can make our own decisions that apply in the campaigns we are participating in, but it leaves things open for confusion and dispute when someone moves from one game to another.

Hence my request for clarity: I can think I know what they meant overall, I (along with my GM and fellow players in my group) can make a decision about how we're interpreting it, but I can then find myself in a dispute when talking about the game, because someone else interpreted things differently and arrived at a different decision.

Given that the noncombat skills that required subchoices were explicit*, it doesn't seem unreasonable to suggest the same effort should have been put into the combat skills. Maybe I haven't looked in the right place(s) yet (as I said, I read through all of the RQ CRQ thread), but an acknowledgement that people are getting confused on this issue and a clarification on what was meant would be appreciated; I was impressed by the Cradles of Heroes online character generator, but the creator didn't realise how the weapon skills are supposed to be split up, they've gone with what's written on the character sheet (looks like they've assumed that Battle Axe means 1H Axe...)

I am unsure as to how to raise this in such a way as to get a definitive ruling from the authors - I had hoped posting here might be it. I will continue my efforts - in our campaign, we have people talking about creating new characters as replacements, partly in case their current character dies, partly to test out new themes and ideas, so getting this information would still be useful to us.

I do thank all the people who have posted on-topic - it has been interesting and informative to see how others have approached the same problem.

The OP

*: nearly all the time - Elder Race Lore is not explicitly a category skill requiring a subchoice on the character sheet. Old Tarsh characters get Ride +5%, instead of Ride (any) +5% like characters from Sartar. There may be other examples - I'm not trying to nitpick the entire book.

[Kloster]

3 hours ago, GAZZA said:

In RQ3, and I believe also in RQ2, there was a very good reason to carry a shield as well as a 1H weapon - a 1H weapon can't attack and parry in the same round.

IIRC, since the errata, it is the same SR, not anymore in the same round, but the problem remain the same. We had tactics to destroy the shield of our opponents, and then were waiting for the SR of his attack to attack just after him.

[Shiningbrow]

20 hours ago, lordabdul said:

The main thing that bothers me is that a swordmaster (say, 150% in Rapier) is as useless as any other newbie when picking up a dagger or a 2H sword. The rule about being able to use other weapons at half skills seems less effective than it should be because of the high number of weapon skills (which can be solved by either extending that rule, or reducing the number of weapon skills).

Perhaps something similar to languages?  Or dialects?  E.g., -20% or so for fairly similar weapons (shortsword to either dagger or broadsword), but not across handedness (1H to 2H) - bigger penalty?

[Lordabdul]

17 minutes ago, Shiningbrow said:

Perhaps something similar to languages?  Or dialects?  E.g., -20% or so for fairly similar weapons (shortsword to either dagger or broadsword), but not across handedness (1H to 2H) - bigger penalty?

Yep, I had something similar in mind when I was talking about "extending the rules": a 2-tier penalty across weapons in the same category vs weapons in other categories. We could take it to another thread if people wanted to explore this more, but frankly I don't really need this kind of house rule yet (I don't even have an ongoing RQ game at the moment).

7 hours ago, Wookie said:

It feels like it might be an editing issue

There are a lot of those, yes. For all the incredible goodness and flavour that's packed in every page of the RQG rulebook, the production of this book has been quite fast, especially compared to its size and scope... as a result, there's a bunch of small/medium mistakes or wording problems that have to be cleared up in Q&As (and compiled on the Well of Daliath for reference). I've been crossing my fingers super hard for the past year that there will be an RQG 1.5 at some point, or something like that.

7 hours ago, Wookie said:

I am unsure as to how to raise this in such a way as to get a definitive ruling from the authors

Posting in the Core Rules Questions thread is usually the way to go, but Scotty's link indicates parts of your questions have already been somewhat answered... although Jason's answers were a bit confusing to me so it might be worth it to ask for clarifications. That said, as someone already pointed out, the authors are very much "sure, why not" type of GMs, more interested in story and worldbuilding than in precise, strictly defined gaming rules. It's frustrating for the rules-lawyers and tacticians out there, but there's a 50% chance the official answer is "handle it the way you think is best and most fun".

[Blindhamster]

I'd really like to see a formal errata document at least. That would be amazing.

a 1.5 document of the core book would be okay too tbh. Although I only just bought the slipcase set, if an erratad version came out i guess id just replace the core book in that.

[Lordabdul]

1 hour ago, Blindhamster said:

I'd really like to see a formal errata document at least. That would be amazing.

There have been two "Rune Fixes" documents so far, available here (but nothing on the topic of this thread AFAIR).

The Well of Daliath's RQ Q&A is also as close to an official errata as we get after the Rune Fixes.

[PhilHibbs]

On 5/8/2020 at 7:59 PM, Blindhamster said:

You're right, the rulebook says if parrying with the same weapon it incurs subsequent penalties. The Implication being that it doesnt with a different weapon (otherwise referring to the same weapon is redundant phrasing that confuses the matter).

No it actually doesn't.

It says you can parry again with the same weapon.

It then says that subsequent parries incur a penalty. This penalty is irrespective of whether it is the same weapon or a different one. I can understand how someone might read on from one sentence to the other and assume a relationship, I probably read it that way at first.

Edited May 9, 2020 by PhilHibbs

[Kloster]

1 hour ago, lordabdul said:

There have been two "Rune Fixes" documents so far, available here (but nothing on the topic of this thread AFAIR).

The Well of Daliath's RQ Q&A is also as close to an official errata as we get after the Rune Fixes.

No. Runefixe 1 is some clarifications and part of the RQ3 non lethal combat ported to RQG. Runefixe 2 is clarifications. Both were needed and are useful. The Well of Daliath is a very useful compilation of explanations and clarifications. But none of them are an errata.

[Lordabdul]

2 hours ago, Kloster said:

But none of them are an errata.

Well if you want to be absolutely strict about this, then on that same page I linked, there's an errata for the 1st printing of RQG. There's also an errata for the Quickstart on the Quickstart page.

[Jason D]

Okay, hopefully this clarifies things for everyone: 

• If a cultural skill modifier refers to a specific weapon, then apply that to the specific weapon . For example, a bonus to Lance is just Lance. 
• If a cultural skill modifier refers to a category, apply that to a specific weapon within that category. For example, a bonus to 1H Spear could be applied to Javelin, Short Spear, or Lance. 
• If a cultural skill modifier is even more general and applies to multiple categories, pick a specific weapon and apply it there. For example, a bonus to Battle Axe could apply to the 1H or 2H Battle Axe, as desired. 
• If a cultural skill modifier refers to a weapon that hypothetically could be a skill category or a specific weapon, use the specific weapon. For example, a bonus to Dagger goes to Dagger, not to Parrying Dagger, Throwing Dagger, or Sickle.  

[Blindhamster]

3 hours ago, Jason Durall said:

If a cultural skill modifier is even more general and applies to multiple categories, pick a specific weapon and apply it there. For example, a bonus to Battle Axe could apply to the 1H or 2H Battle Axe, as desired. 

Hi Jason, thanks for the clarification, really helpful!

Could i ask for further elaboration here? With Battle Axe you only get the bonus for either 1H or 2H Battle Axe? Does that mean that with Javelins, you now only get the bonus to either Melee Javelin or Missile Javelin, not both anymore?

That doesn't seem to quite match What you said, previously in relation to Javelins, so wondering if perhaps Battle Axe should work like Javelin and give you the bonus to both 1H and 2H battle axe (meaning the character could switch between 1H and 2H as desired depending on if they had full use of their other arm)

On 5/8/2020 at 8:41 PM, Blindhamster said:

  On 2/1/2019 at 3:43 PM, Jason Durall said:

Yes. It's not explicit, but when get a cultural or professional skill bonus to a starting weapon (such as a javelin) that can be thrown or used in hand-to-hand, you start with both at the same skill. If you add points to them while customizing your character, you should assign those points to one or the other. 

Thanks again!

 

 

edit -

Re reading, actually, what you've written may be saying the same thing, is it saying that you get the bonus with both 1h Battle axe and 2h Battle axe as they're the same weapon? If so, awesome the bullet points are exactly what I tried to summarize but better explained!

Edited May 11, 2020 by Blindhamster

[Arcadiagt5]

On 5/8/2020 at 12:31 AM, Wookie said:

Thank you to everyone who has replied to this thread.

Just dropping back in to second this. I really do like having RuneQuest back in print, and I'm enjoying running it, but I am struggling with several areas of the rules even now.

So, as Wookie said, thanks all. 

[Arcadiagt5]

On 5/8/2020 at 2:04 AM, Blindhamster said:

Think it can be summarized as:

• skills are always for a specific weapon, if a weapon can be used in multiple ways (2 vs 1 hands, melee vs missile), its two separate skills.
• if a culture/rune/occupation gives a bonus to a weapon category, you must choose ONE weapon from that category.
• if a culture/rune/occupation gives a bonus to a weapon, it applies to all skills for that weapon
• any increases via customisation points or improvements during play must be against a specific skill for the specific weapon (if you use it 1 handed, increase that, if you throw a javeline, increase missile weapons javeline etc).

That's useful, thanks. I'm not sure I entirely agree with the third bullet point, but as a starting summary that's really good. 

[Arcadiagt5]

On 5/11/2020 at 7:15 PM, Jason Durall said:

Okay, hopefully this clarifies things for everyone: 

• If a cultural skill modifier refers to a specific weapon, then apply that to the specific weapon . For example, a bonus to Lance is just Lance. 
• If a cultural skill modifier refers to a category, apply that to a specific weapon within that category. For example, a bonus to 1H Spear could be applied to Javelin, Short Spear, or Lance. 
• If a cultural skill modifier is even more general and applies to multiple categories, pick a specific weapon and apply it there. For example, a bonus to Battle Axe could apply to the 1H or 2H Battle Axe, as desired. 
• If a cultural skill modifier refers to a weapon that hypothetically could be a skill category or a specific weapon, use the specific weapon. For example, a bonus to Dagger goes to Dagger, not to Parrying Dagger, Throwing Dagger, or Sickle.  

Thank you, much appreciated.

[Brootse]

40 minutes ago, Arcadiagt5 said:

Just dropping back in to second this. I really do like having RuneQuest back in print, and I'm enjoying running it, but I am struggling with several areas of the rules even now.

So, as Wookie said, thanks all. 

Agreed.