Jump to content
Fred

Favorite House Rules

Recommended Posts

  About Skills and categories

52 minutes ago, DreadDomain said:

Wow, you are going back to RQ3, no kidding! Are you also using RQ3 skill categories?

Seems I'm not the only one still using RQ3 Core rules (Creation / Skills / Combat) + RQG novelties (Mainly Magic, Passions, affinities and Runes).

-RQ3 Skills set are more usefull for Road movies, trekking and adventures (Indiana Jones style).
-RQ3 combat are more precise, moving and tactical oriented (no hazardous initiative).

20 minutes ago, Kloster said:

I still don't know. I don't like having the modifiers coming from tables. I prefer having the RQ3 formulas where every attribute point counts (and that avoids also the problem of a high strength giant that has a combat modifier so high it hits every time, and also with RQG combat, that you can't hit), but my mind is not yet made, because I am afraid of loosing some equilibrium. For instance, the magic category modifier is completely different between RQ3 and RQG. I will perhaps try to use RQ3-like formulas to the RQG categories. That would remove the 5% steps for a single point of attribute that the RQ2/RQG tables are creating, limit the bonus created by secondary attributes and remove a few tables.

I had the very same problem, RQ3 modifiers was not perfectly equilibrate but RQ2-RQG tables doesn't feel right, the conversion say "choose the best of the two world" but there a few solutions I had propect :
-Include modifiers in base skills (mrq) but you loose the CAR evolution influence
-Change RQ2 tables (times consuming and I hate tables)
-Optimise RQ3 calculus (keep the logic, simplifies the calculation)

-Suppress the modifiers and like some recent game, create a bonus for each CAR and let the player choose and explain which CAR he choose to support his skill

Personally, I really love the last one but optimising rq3 was faster n 'simpler for me and my players. I ended up having each modifier at the same scale of an CAR, so no categories have some high value and discretion always in the negative... (exemple : Agilité et défense Dex + For/2 –Tai/2,  Magie Int + Pou/2 + Dex/2, Discrétion Dex + Int/2 –Tai/2).

hope it could help you a tiny bit

7 minutes ago, Kloster said:

The only points that really bothers me is the passions: I hate having the SYSTEM telling me what my character has to do (but no problem having the game world telling me how he should behave), but is it quite integral to the system and is the base of the Runes rules.

Passions and affinities seems to be annoying but my main reproach is the bonus given (start at 60%, bonus too small and not worth it). The simpler way to deal with it when a player refuse to apply the rule or malus : I consider it a natural fumble, no exp check, suppress the exp check if present and immediate loss of -1D10% in the passion or rune. Problem solved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, MJ Sadique said:

RQ3 Skills set are more usefull for Road movies, trekking and adventures (Indiana Jones style).

It is also possible to add the missing skills to the RQG set. Easier.

12 minutes ago, MJ Sadique said:

RQ3 combat are more precise, moving and tactical oriented (no hazardous initiative).

Definitely the most important point for me.

14 minutes ago, MJ Sadique said:

Change RQ2 tables (times consuming and I hate tables)

Same for me. Sometimes, they are needed, but most of the time, they just slow down the game.

15 minutes ago, MJ Sadique said:

Optimise RQ3 calculus (keep the logic, simplifies the calculation)

Personally, I really love the last one but optimising rq3 was faster n 'simpler for me and my players. I ended up having each modifier at the same scale of an CAR, so no categories have some high value and discretion always in the negative... (exemple : Agilité et défense Dex + For/2 –Tai/2,  Magie Int + Pou/2 + Dex/2, Discrétion Dex + Int/2 –Tai/2).

I've not thought about those changes. For me, the RQ3 values are correct and your changes greatly augment the modifiers (and simplify a lot the calculations). I'm not sure I would go that way because I am not bothered by a simple calculus done only at character creation and when a stat changes, and because I think it gives a too big effect to the stats over the skills. BRP is skill based, after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, MJ Sadique said:

Seems I'm not the only one still using RQ3 Core rules (Creation / Skills / Combat) + RQG novelties (Mainly Magic, Passions, affinities and Runes).

In fact, I'm closer to RQG than you. Almost all of my changes are in the combat. I also get rid of the 'above 100% opposed rolls' rule and of the '1 adventure per season' rule (replaced by 3 weeks of extraordinary activity per season), but not much more. I will perhaps add a few tweaks from this thread, but not much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Crel said:

Hope they work well for you :).

There's a very real possibility they're better than my intuition. And, after all, my main source of discussion on the rules has been this rather-opinionated forum, so there's plenty of chance we're not the majority, but just think we are. :D

Anyway, whatever makes your game work well for you is the correct way to play. But if you find you do really like 'em, I'd love to hear what makes the rules work for you. Could be I'm wrong!

Will do! I just find it to be more exciting if at higher level of play, not everyone has 100% chance to parry etc. That special success chance is reduced on parry on a 55 to reduced 35 chance etc. But I guess I will find out if it works... It is interesting how the rules does not seem to apply to a parry over 100% though. Parry is committed as the attack happens, an opposed roll, yet a parry chance of 120% does not seem to reduce the attack chance of 20%. Perhaps it should.

Edited by Fred
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Fred said:

Parry is committed as the attack happens, an opposed roll, yet a parry chance of 120% does not seem to reduce the attack chance of 20%. Perhaps it should.

It does. RAW, if the Parry, or more properly the defender skill is at 120% and the attacker one is lower, the parry is made at 100% and the attacker is reduced by 20%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Kloster said:

It does. RAW, if the Parry, or more properly the defender skill is at 120% and the attacker one is lower, the parry is made at 100% and the attacker is reduced by 20%.

It was how I was going to play it to be fair. Yes, the phrasing of the passage started with pointing out how this applies to “block, dodge, parry and otherwise oppose“ a character’s ability, but at the end they actually spoke of opposed rolls in general. Nothing else makes sense anyway.

Sometimes, the way things are phrased in the rules makes me make a wrong assumption early on in a passage, and not react properly when that assumption is countered or clarified later in the same text. 

4 hours ago, Kloster said:

I also get rid of (the 'above 100% opposed rolls' rule) and of the '1 adventure per season' rule (replaced by 3 weeks of extraordinary activity per season), but not much more. I will perhaps add a few tweaks from this thread, but not much.

Most likely getting rid of this one also (adventure part), but I might not let the adventurers roll for upping their skills more than once a year. Undecided.
 

Probably not as I will acquire Six Seasons in Sartar POD and then thinking if it is possible to stick in adventures from Pegasus Plateau as in betweens, so I don’t want adventurers get over-powered in the main campaign. Not sure if they could fit together though? Any idea?

 

Edited by Fred

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Fred said:

Most likely getting rid of this one also (adventure part), but I might not let the adventurers roll for upping their skills more than once a year. Undecided.

I will use the RQ3 experience: 1 experience check after 1 adventure AND 1 week of downtime. That will solve my problem with the current experience flow that I feel too much slower than with previous versions. And that will solve the problem of the adventures that have various length and duration: the shorter I have played is less than 1 night, as 'River of Cradles' is several weeks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Fred said:

Probably not as I will acquire Six Seasons in Sartar POD and then thinking if it is possible to stick in adventures from Pegasus Plateau as in betweens, so I don’t want adventurers get over-powered in the main campaign. Not sure if they could fit together though? Any idea?

As I feel current experience rules too slow, I don't have much thought about slowing it further.😁

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Kloster said:

As I feel current experience rules too slow, I don't have much thought about slowing it further.😁

Not having played RQ yet, mostly due to Covid, I have a concern this may be true, but as Sartar is balanced for this slow development, I’d avoid tinkering with the progress, as it may have a ripple effect with adjustments needed in difficulty level as the campaign moves on.

Edited by Fred

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Kloster said:

It does. RAW, if the Parry, or more properly the defender skill is at 120% and the attacker one is lower, the parry is made at 100% and the attacker is reduced by 20%.

And this is one of the game's biggest problems, since it means that you can easily "skill-tank" huge but not very skilled enemies, like giants or dinosaurs. It's perfectly fine if you have to parry, as they tend to do a lot of damage, but this reduction trivializes fights that should be really difficult.

House Rule on this is that no-one gets the chance to hit or defend reduced by more than half. It's a little clumsy, but better than the alternative.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Akhôrahil said:

And this is one of the game's biggest problems, since it means that you can easily "skill-tank" huge but not very skilled enemies, like giants or dinosaurs. It's perfectly fine if you have to parry, as they tend to do a lot of damage, but this reduction trivializes fights that should be really difficult.

House Rule on this is that no-one gets the chance to hit or defend reduced by more than half. It's a little clumsy, but better than the alternative.

My house rule is to remove entirely the 'above 100% opposed rolls' rule, if only because I prefer the higher chance of crits and specials.

1 hour ago, Akhôrahil said:

And this is one of the game's biggest problems, since it means that you can easily "skill-tank" huge but not very skilled enemies, like giants or dinosaurs. It's perfectly fine if you have to parry, as they tend to do a lot of damage, but this reduction trivializes fights that should be really difficult.

It also render useless the hordes of trollkins, that have now no chance to hit. It (combined with the single skill for attack and parry and the RQ2 style category modifiers) makes almost impossible to hit a giant (because it's strength makes it's attack and parry so high you can not ever hope to hit it,...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Kloster said:

My house rule is to remove entirely the 'above 100% opposed rolls' rule, if only because I prefer the higher chance of crits and specials.

What is good about it is that a fight between two people at 95% weapon skill can be stupidly long (well, it will be even under this rule, but as soon as one is better than the other, it starts to sort itself out).

Edited by Akhôrahil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Akhôrahil said:

a fight between two people at 95% weapon skill can be stupidly long

I ran a ritual fight in RQG that was at this level (where ritual proscribed the use of magic).  Long and BORING!  Felt like I stepped back into the RQ3 days of long, boring combats.

I'm definitely staying with the over 100% rules (though I expect my house rule will be to halve the difference and then apply to the opponent).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, DreadDomain said:

That is quite the house rule!! 😀

Wait until I figure out if my "GURPS: Roleplaying in Glorantha" is a viable or stupid idea :D (I'm still noodling with it at this point)

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Akhôrahil said:

What is good about it is that a fight between two people at 95% weapon skill can be stupidly long (well, it will be even under this rule, but as soon as one is better than the other, it starts to sort itself out).

 

1 hour ago, jajagappa said:

I ran a ritual fight in RQG that was at this level (where ritual proscribed the use of magic).  Long and BORING!  Felt like I stepped back into the RQ3 days of long, boring combats.

I'm definitely staying with the over 100% rules (though I expect my house rule will be to halve the difference and then apply to the opponent).

 

We never had this kind of fight (attack/parry ... wait for the critical) because we used extensively and ceatively the maneuvers that RQ3 gave us. This was a constant fight of outthinking and outmaneuvering the opponent(s). And this is one of the big things I am missing with the new rules. Perhaps is this valid only for our group. I don't know, but it worked fine for us and I am trying to recreate it with RQG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "house rule" that I think got most use at my table was Nikk Effingham's point-based character creation rules for RQ3.

Edited by PhilHibbs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About the skills above 100% :

Most of the rules are made so player don't need anything than the "Ability Result Table" because the quickstart table go up to 100% and the RGQ to 122%. So most of the rules are made for player not to use an calculator. I never used the table because my first RQ master prefer to calculate Dice_roll x5 / Dice_roll x20 to evaluate special or critical, it's a thousand time faster than looking at the table.
Joke apart, he only read the table once because his perfect and annoying memory help him to do so 😒. Even with perfect memory or ability to recalculate the table mentally, changing the calculus was faster for all players, so fights did not take long...

2 hours ago, Akhôrahil said:

What is good about it is that a fight between two people at 95% weapon skill can be stupidly long (well, it will be even under this rule, but as soon as one is better than the other, it starts to sort itself out).

1 hour ago, jajagappa said:

I ran a ritual fight in RQG that was at this level (where ritual proscribed the use of magic).  Long and BORING!  Felt like I stepped back into the RQ3 days of long, boring combats.

RQ3 wasn't so boring and long, Not when you play with Fatigue... yeah, i know it's a big mean word but with fatigue rule, the 5-10 first round is boring but quickly the malus fatigue will rise and the skills will drop from the "I'm so badass that I cannot fail" to a "Why did buy I take this full mail ...?" and on top of this I also use the rq2 sapienza or swenson ENC variants, too much funny...

6 minutes ago, Kloster said:

We never had this kind of fight (attack/parry ... wait for the critical) because we used extensively and ceatively the maneuvers that RQ3 gave us.

Another reason I love RQ3, I event had some new manoeuvres when my players choose to have a Vormain Bushi ... (they really hate L5R for the not so realistic play which could be done with RQ3) I create a lot of manoeuvres based on existing martials arts and tactics, mainly Shisengumi's Hirazuki, Jigen-Ryû's All-in-One-Strike and Sasaki Kojiro's Tsubamegaeshi.

The gameplay between those with manoeuvres + tactics and those without is like heaven and earth !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, PhilHibbs said:

The "house rule" that I think got most use at my table was Nikk Effingham's point-based character creation rules for RQ3.

I am curious about these. Would you mind sharing (if it is convenient)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about this?

If you have over 100% in a skill, for every 50% chance over the opponents chance you have in an opposed roll, then the opponents chance of success is reduced by 10%.

Anyone who gets their chance of success reduced this way still has their original chance of special success, up to half their chance to succeed. (You could opt to have specials reduced also, but that would not work so well in the first example below when a chance over 100% is reduced)

160% versus 110%. 110% gets reduced to 85% but with 22% special, 5% critical. Even with 110%, remember, you only have 95% chance of success to start with.

160% versus 45%. 45% gets reduced to 25%, with 9% special and 2% critical.

In both cases, 160% has 32% special and 8% critical.

Then again, don’t players divide their attacks to several with high chances quite often?

I am playing with this. Anyone who can improve it? Or does it sound interesting? Flaws? Does it help with any combat issues (enough)?

(In retrospect, I think it may be easier to simply reduce the chance to tops down to one half of their chance, as suggested by others, but I will have a think)

Edited by Fred

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Kloster said:

My house rule is to remove entirely the 'above 100% opposed rolls' rule, if only because I prefer the higher chance of crits and specials.

For combat specifically, RQ is one of these games that can accomodate this because even a successful attack vs a successful parry is not a "no consequence". Damage might go through, weapons can break, etc. And then the odd special or crit turns the table.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Borygon said:

Berserker works for the entire duration. You will keep on fighting even if you die.

Spooky one. I can see it work particularly well under certain type of gods.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My house rules are focused on three points :

 

creation :

  • no roll for characteristic, a global amount to split betweeb the characteristic.
  • roll for history only if the player doesn't want (or has issue) to create a background

experience :

  • adventure xp. As rule except you can check knowledge (or other) IF and ONLY if the PC discover / understand something new.
  • occupational xp. More skills can be chosen : local skills (culture, language, etc..) or any skill explained by the player (but sometimes, penalties on revenues)
  • I go back on previous RQ training rules (more skilled you are more time you need to improve the skill)

magic :

gods and spirits exist. Ils sont donc ils pensent

So they are able to decide if yes or not they give you their power. They are not "just a source of player power"

Spirit magic :

  • If you use a spirit spell in the way of the spirit no issue (well that means about 100% of the time)
  • If you use a spirit spell in a bad way, you will lose it (for example ... sleep then kill the guy)

Rune magic :

  • you cannot merge rune spells from different rune pools (ex: Ernalda extension and Orlanth rain)
  • Penalty if you try to use a spell against the god's interest :
    • A Sword want to use sever spirit against a trollkin : -200%. If fumble, retribution spirit
    • Using thunder bold against an orlanthi priest ? Who is the Orlanth best interest  ? opposition roll (Orlanth devotion) with any bonus/malus depending on the situation.
    • I don't know how illumination could impact it, maybe you cheat the god. An illuminate initiate can be seen calling the god rune power : between an initiate (calling the god power) and a sorcerer (calling the rune power). I m waiting to read illumination rules before deciding

 

Heroic magic :

that's your power so do what you want

Sorcery magic  :

that's your knowledge so do what you want

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, French Desperate WindChild said:

A Sword want to use sever spirit against a trollkin : -200%. If fumble, retribution spirit

What's wrong with that? Dead is dead, right? I don't see why Humakt would care if you killed that trollkin with a sword or a Sever Spirit. Yes, it's overkill, but that's really up to the player IMO. Am I missing something?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...