Runequest 2ed Questions

[Scout]

Hey all, 

Hoping someone can help me with some RQ2 questions I have. 

Page 12: I don’t fully understand the training rules. 

Basic training costs in Glorantha are 400 L a week for eight hours a day. This can be subdivided into four two-hour sessions at 100 L a week each.

Is the 100 L on top of the 400 L, for the privilege of having the 8 hour block broken up?

Then:

TRAINING
This cost basis for characteristic improvement is the same as the cost basis of any skill (as opposed to spell) found in this book. In short, for every week (6 days) of training at 2 hours a day, the cost is 100 L.

I thought it said 400 L a week for eight hours a day. 

Thanks all. 
 

[David Scott]

10 minutes ago, Scout said:

Hey all, 

Hoping someone can help me with some RQ2 questions I have. 

Page 12: I don’t fully understand the training rules. 

Basic training costs in Glorantha are 400 L a week for eight hours a day. This can be subdivided into four two-hour sessions at 100 L a week each.

Is the 100 L on top of the 400 L, for the privilege of having the 8 hour block broken up?

No, it's just flexable. A 2 hour session costs 100L, but you need 4 to reach the 400L cost

10 minutes ago, Scout said:

Then:

TRAINING
This cost basis for characteristic improvement is the same as the cost basis of any skill (as opposed to spell) found in this book. In short, for every week (6 days) of training at 2 hours a day, the cost is 100 L.

I thought it said 400 L a week for eight hours a day. 

Yes, It's defining a training week as 6 out of 7 days. It's 400L / week (6 out of 7 days) at 8 hours a day.

[Scout]

Of course! Thank you David. 

[Scout]

I just created a character, rolled his Characteristics, then applied what modifiers there were to the skills. I'm now on the 'Mechanics and Melee' chapter and haven't seen any rules to add more points to the skills. Do I get any more points? They're pitifully low. 

Edited September 14, 2021 by Scout

[Ludo Bagman]

52 minutes ago, Scout said:

Do I get any more points? They're pitifully low. 

There is an appendix (H) at the end of the book with additional experience rules. It assumes that the character is older and did spend that time working and training.

[Baron Wulfraed]

2 hours ago, Scout said:

I just created a character, rolled his Characteristics, then applied what modifiers there were to the skills. I'm now on the 'Mechanics and Melee' chapter and haven't seen any rules to add more points to the skills. Do I get any more points? They're pitifully low. 

RQ2 (and the "Classic" reprint) generates characters that are basically 15 year old (kids by modern standards) likely using a tree branch as a mace/club wearing the equivalent of a heavy carpet for armor <G>. I don't recall my group ever using the "additional experience" rules. RQ3 made "additional experience" standard, based upon "parents occupation" and a 1D6 (or was it 1D4) roll to determine age and corollary occupation increases -- one roll per skill per year). Starting characters in RQ2 need to run at least a game year as lay member before even attempting to become cult initiate.

RQ:RiG assumes a flat age of 21 by end of character generation, so occupation and cult skills are single numbers representing accumulated skills over the years.

So... RQ2 beginners tend have skills in the 25-40% range. RQ3 tended to have skills in the 35-50% range. RQ:RiG tends to be 75% or greater (as my first generated character reveals -- 115% Broadsword).

Edited September 14, 2021 by Baron Wulfraed

[Scout]

But, the highest score I have is 25 for Perception (Listen). All others are 5 or 10. Actually, with -5 Stealth, I have a few skills at 0%. That cannot be correct. 

[Bill the barbarian]

Yes, when someone says zero to hero this is one of the places this expression came from. Have you read the Saga of Ruric, he starts about as good as you and has a tree branch/club!

Edited September 14, 2021 by Bill the barbarian

[Scout]

22 minutes ago, Bill the barbarian said:

Yes, when someone says zero to hero this is one of the places this expression came from. Have you read the Saga of Ruric, he starts about as good as you and has a tree branch/club!

On one hand, I really don't mind at all, but I'm worried my buddies will throw me out the window because they keep failing at dice rolls. 

[Bill the barbarian]

5 minutes ago, Scout said:

but I'm worried my buddies will throw me out the window because they keep failing at dice rolls.

You just have to hope they fumble their throw roll!
if they used the RQ2 rules... it would be more likely!

Edited September 14, 2021 by Bill the barbarian

[simonh]

53 minutes ago, Scout said:

On one hand, I really don't mind at all, but I'm worried my buddies will throw me out the window because they keep failing at dice rolls. 

Just put them through militia training in the Appendix. That should get them going. In practice many GMs house ruled additional experience and training, and there’s no reason you shouldn’t either.

[jajagappa]

5 hours ago, Scout said:

I just created a character, rolled his Characteristics, then applied what modifiers there were to the skills. I'm now on the 'Mechanics and Melee' chapter and haven't seen any rules to add more points to the skills. Do I get any more points? They're pitifully low. 

One of the reasons I prefer the character generation in RQG.

Everyone started very low in RQ2.  Typically you want to follow the guidelines in Appendix H (p.118+) to give them additional experience.  Militia or one of the varied types of infantry/cavalry or apprenticeship. 

There are alternate approaches you could take depending on what books you have at hand.  If you have RQG available, add in the Cultural and Occupation modifiers.

If you don't have RQG, then the Cultural modifiers work out to roughly +75% in non-combat skills (figure +25% in Herd, Farm, or a Craft, some Communication skill at +10%, and the rest in Perception, Agility or Knowledge skills) plus Speak Own Language at 50% and local Customs at 25%; and roughly +90% in combat skills.  That would give you a reasonable bump up.

[Bren]

We almost always used the previous experience rules in the Appendix. That resulted in characters who would succeed at the skills they were good at at least as often as not.

[NickMiddleton]

11 hours ago, Scout said:

But, the highest score I have is 25 for Perception (Listen). All others are 5 or 10. Actually, with -5 Stealth, I have a few skills at 0%. That cannot be correct. 

What you have is a raw, entirely untrained 15-16 year old. If you look at pages 25, 34 and others (in the Classic edition) you can see how starting characters can get credit with various bodies for training:

Quote

By long tradition, the guilds, etc., must train those who come before them. There is nothing to say they must do it for free. However, beginning Adventurers do have the privilege of obtaining credit from the guilds.

This credit takes the form of 100 L multiplied by a specific characteristic the guilds are interested in. The diviners of guilds determine how much credit is to be given, and their divination is exact. Thus, Rurik, applying for fighting training, would be given a credit of 1200 L (STR 12 x 100 L) because the fighting guilds base their credit allowances on STR. Other guilds base their training on other characteristics, as will be explained in the chapters dealing with magic and other skills.

It’s a tad fiddly, and scattered through various chapters, but you can get a chunk of training to lift starting skills (and some initial magic): but it leaves you with significant debts to various guilds… …which gives a solid reason for characters to be taking risky but rewarding jobs to try to pay off those debts!

As far as I can recall, we always used the Appendix H rules and had starting characters who were early twenties, rather than kids fresh off the farm.

 

Edited September 15, 2021 by NickMiddleton

[Scout]

Thanks all, looks like problem solved. 

[Kloster]

12 hours ago, Baron Wulfraed said:

RQ3 made "additional experience" standard, based upon "parents occupation" and a 1D6 (or was it 1D4) roll to determine age and corollary occupation increases -- one roll per skill per year).

In RQ3, age was 2D6+15, and each year of the roll was a skill increase: if you rolled 7, your age was 22 and a skill described as x3 received 7*3=21% to add to the base.

3 hours ago, NickMiddleton said:

It’s a tad fiddly, and scattered through various chapters, but you can get a chunk of training to lift starting skills (and some initial magic): but it leaves you with significant debts to various guilds… …which gives a solid reason for characters to be taking risky but rewarding jobs to try to pay off those debts!

As far as I can recall, we always used the Appendix H rules and had starting characters who were early twenties, rather than kids fresh off the farm.

Same for me.

[Baron Wulfraed]

18 hours ago, Scout said:

On one hand, I really don't mind at all, but I'm worried my buddies will throw me out the window because they keep failing at dice rolls. 

That's half the fun of RQ2... And my Gamemaster used the system I've adopted for characteristic rolls -- Best 3 out of 4 D6 (RQ2 didn't use 2D6+6 for SIZ and INT, one of my characters was only around 5 feet tall, swinging a 4.5 foot bastard sword one handed [low SIZ, 18 STR and whatever DEX was needed])

Fumbles (and other combats) I remember from the mid-80s:

• Sprain ankle (I seem to recall), helmet twisted around, lose three rounds to get it straight. So I sat their for three rounds resetting my helmet while a troll-kin is taking free swings at me... AND MISSING EACH TIME. I got the helmet straight, picked up my weapon -- and troll-kin surrendered in shame.
• Hit nearest friend, do max damage (this was the above shrimp with the bastard sword, and we'd had time to increase skills and armor by then). Based on discussion of who was standing where, the "nearest friend" was just behind me on my off-side -- which means I had to have swung round-house, gotten dragged by missing the opponent and twisted around for the sword to hit said friend. As I recall, between armor and chest HPs, my hit left him with one HP in the chest. Basically held together by his spine.
• Not quite a fumble, and with more advanced characters than beginners -- I had an elf using a rapier from the back of a trained horse (wimpy elf -- he had to take strength training to use a bow, since one had to have bow skill before being allowed to grow an elf-bow as I recall). Had a fight with another mounted opponent. Our horses were doing more damage to each other than we were -- in fact, both horses were killed in the same melee round [had some jokes about that as my /stallion/ was taking a bite out of the other's hindquarters, which came down from a rear&plunge on my horse's head/neck]. Both of us managed to roll clear of the falling animals and got to our feet. Opponent took a look around before combat resumed, and realize he was the only one left from his side, my party was standing around watching... Another surrender.
• And one great mistake... Our mounted party, at the time not realizing how effective a double row of set pikes could be, charged the pikes. Lost at least half the horses. We tended to run two characters so if one was killed we still had a role in the session. Out of my two, one lost horse, but recovered on foot [think it was the same bastard sword shrimp]. Foot character started up between the two lines of pikemen, basically taking one swing at each in passing. Remaining mounted character was about two strike ranks behind, zig-zagging the horse across the lines, taking swings at the opponent the shrimp had just moved on from -- so opponents had choice of defending against shrimp with big sword, or defending against mounted character with damage bonus; at that short range, pikes weren't of any use.

ADDENDUM: out first characters basically were allowed to wander from town, and our first fights were with the keeper of a "troll-bridge" -- after the keeper had been replaced a few times we concluded it was cheaper to just pay the few coppers to cross [by that time we had enough to afford it]. Roving bands of troll-kin were the most common enemy until we'd gotten to a middle level and made initiate status, and started encountering broos [my GM's bad punning: they were led by a chief named "Mila Waukee"] The highest any of us reached was just up to priesthood (RQ2 cults had both RuneLord and RunePriest for Humakt] -- and I had to buy my way into the priesthood (donations to cult earned x% to the chance of acceptance -- so donate enough to bring success to 95%, no need for more as 96-00 is still failure)

Edited September 15, 2021 by Baron Wulfraed

[Shiningbrow]

On 9/15/2021 at 5:39 AM, Scout said:

I have a few skills at 0%. That cannot be correct. 

Yes, most definitely can be correct!

What shouldn't be correct is skills at 0% that one should have acquired and become proficient with (or at least, marginally competent). That's why many skills have a higher base chance, especially the general world skills (eg, climb or jump).

[Scout]

But, if I have Characteristics that result in a -5% modifier, and Pick Pockets has a base of 5%, that's 0%. Or am I missing something?

[Kloster]

30 minutes ago, Scout said:

But, if I have Characteristics that result in a -5% modifier, and Pick Pockets has a base of 5%, that's 0%. Or am I missing something?

You don't miss anything, your math are right and your skill is 0%.

[jajagappa]

1 hour ago, Kloster said:

You don't miss anything, your math are right and your skill is 0%.

There's always a 5% chance of success even if the modifier reduces you to 0%.

Only skills with base chance of 0% are truly at 0%.

[Kloster]

3 hours ago, jajagappa said:

There's always a 5% chance of success even if the modifier reduces you to 0%.

Only skills with base chance of 0% are truly at 0%.

I remember that with 0%, you can not succeed, but my memories about RQ2 are from 40 years away, so I can be wrong.

[David Scott]

14 hours ago, Kloster said:

I remember that with 0%, you can not succeed, but my memories about RQ2 are from 40 years away, so I can be wrong.

Due to structure of the rules, it's inferred from page 21 (CE):

Quote

The basic chance for most attacks or parries (and most skills) is 5%.

A roll of 01-05 on D100 will always mean a successful attack or parry. Conversely, a roll of 96-00 on D100 will always mean an unsuccessful attempt at whatever is being attempted.

 

Edited September 17, 2021 by David Scott

[Scout]

Page 24: Rurik's Tavern Brawl (example)

"The cudgel lands on Herkan’s abdomen, for a roll of 10 out of the 12 a heavy mace (cudgel) can do."

Page 27: Weapon Statistics Table

Heavy Mace (cudgel) does 1d8+2 damage.

How could it do 12 damage if the Heavy Mace (cudgel) only does a maximum of 10? Is this errata?

 

Edited September 18, 2021 by Scout

[PhilHibbs]

Yep, looks like a mistake to me. A new errata for a 43 year old game!