Tips for running exciting combat in RuneQuest

[PhilHibbs]

On 5/4/2022 at 7:13 AM, smiorgan said:

Guidance for the thread: don't post complex house rules.

How about a simple idea then... Alter one or more of the "...vs special parry" entries in the combat results matrix so that the attacker sometimes can't use their weapon next round. That way they are forced to do something different like shield-bash, kick, cast a spell, etc. just to keep things interesting. Maybe even a special parry results table like the fumble table, if you get a special-vs-normal or crit-vs-special, but that's straying into "complex".

There are two different official versions of the combat results table anyway, so inventing your own third version is entirely within the spirit of the rules.

[smiorgan]

On 5/10/2022 at 3:25 PM, PhilHibbs said:

 

There are two different official versions of the combat results table anyway, so inventing your own third version is entirely within the spirit of the rules.

I've noticed that the Starter Set combat table wording is different from (some versions of?) the rulebook, but I never managed to memorize the differences! 

If anything, I'd be interested in understanding what happens if you *ignore the table altogether* and you just apply what's in the main rules text. I.e. If something is written only in the table it does not exist. Is this going to speed up combat?

 

[PhilHibbs]

11 hours ago, smiorgan said:

I'd be interested in understanding what happens if you *ignore the table altogether* and you just apply what's in the main rules text. I.e. If something is written only in the table it does not exist. Is this going to speed up combat?

I suspect that the table is necessary, but it's an interesting idea. You'd certainly end up with different outcomes in some cases but that isn't a show-stopper.

I suspect that it would take longer though, because you'd have to keep checking the rules unless you have a better memory than me.

Edited May 12, 2022 by PhilHibbs

[DreadDomain]

On 5/12/2022 at 6:53 AM, smiorgan said:

I've noticed that the Starter Set combat table wording is different from (some versions of?) the rulebook, but I never managed to memorize the differences! 

There is only one mechanical difference between the two: the core book matrix states that a critical attack delivers maximum special damage against a special parry. The starter set matrix does not agree with the core book matrix on that.

On 5/12/2022 at 6:53 AM, smiorgan said:

If anything, I'd be interested in understanding what happens if you *ignore the table altogether* and you just apply what's in the main rules text. I.e. If something is written only in the table it does not exist. Is this going to speed up combat?

Ignoring the table in RQG is difficult because the results are comparative between offense and defense. This is not unlike Mythras except that the effects are set in stone. See my summary from another thread:

On 2/18/2022 at 1:55 PM, DreadDomain said:

There are a few exceptions in the table but if the attack is successful, the matrix is generally a "compare success level" mechanic. Looking at the Attack/Parry Table: 

A) If attack fails and defender rolls a... (refer to C below for Fumbles)

• Failure - Attack and Defense miss
• Normal parry - Attack is parried, deflected or missed. Defender rolls parrying weapon’s normal damage. Attacking weapon’s HP reduced by 1 HP if damage over its current HP.
• Special parry -Attack is parried, deflected or missed. Defender rolls parrying weapon’s special damage. Attacking weapon’s HP reduced by any damage over its current HP.
• Critical parry - Attack is parried, deflected or missed. Defender rolls parrying weapon’s special damage. Attacking weapon’s HP reduced by the damage rolled.

B) If attack succeeds, compare Attacker and Defender success level where Critical = 2, Special = 1, Normal, Fail or Fumble = 0 (refer to C below for Fumbles)

Success Level (Attacker SL - Defender SL)    

• Attacker wins by 2 - Attacker rolls max special damage. If Defender’s roll is successful, damage equal to weapon HP is parried and affected hit location takes any excess damage and ignores armor. Parrying weapon takes damage rolled to HP.
• Attacker wins by 1 - Attacker rolls special damage.  If Defender’s roll is successful, damage equal to weapon HP is parried. Parrying weapon and affected hit location takes any excess damage.
• Both are equal - Attacker's roll is successful, rolls normal damage. If Defender’s roll is successful, damage equal to weapon HP is parried. Parrying weapon takes 1 HP damage if damage more than its current HP. Any excess damage goes to the affected hit location.
• Defender wins by 1 - Attack is parried, deflected or missed. Defender rolls parrying weapon’s normal damage. Attacking weapon’s HP reduced by 1 HP if damage over its current HP.
• Defender wins by 2 - Attack is parried, deflected or missed. Defender rolls parrying weapon’s special damage. Attacking weapon’s HP reduced by any damage over its current HP.
   

C) When a Fumble is rolled, roll on the Fumbles Table

 

Now, to put it out there, framing it that way does not make it easier to understand. What it does is help see the system behind it and instead of having to remember 25 results  (a 5x5 matrix), there are only 10 results to remember with 2 of them not really difficult to remember (when you roll a fumble, roll on the fumble table, and when you both fail, well, you both fail). 

Also, what I wrote above is not 100% aligned with the official Attack/Parry table as there are at least two exceptions. On the matrix, a failed attack against a fumbled parry does normal damage. I tend to just ignore this exception as it is already taken care of on the fumble table (results 87 and above). Second, the core book matrix states that a critical attack delivers maximum special damage against a special parry. In my summary above, it would be "Attacker wins by 1 - Attacker rolls special damage". The starter set matrix does not agree with the core book matrix on that.

 

To ignore the table, it is easier to use combat results from RQ3 since your attack result is not "downgraded" by the defense result. If you rolled a special attack, you can roll your special damage. The defense result will determine how much gets through and how affected the weapons are:

On 2/18/2022 at 4:34 PM, DreadDomain said:

They were much easier because the attack and defense results were mostly independent of one another instead of comparative. For RQ3, I think it went mostly like this:

Attack Results    

• Critical - Inflict maximum special damage, bypasses armour
• Special - Inflict special damage
• Normal - Inflict normal damage
• Fail - Parried, deflected or missed
• Fumble - Parried, deflected or missed, roll on Fumbles Table

    
Parry Results    

• Critical* - The attack is parried
• Special* - Damage equal to weapon AP is parried. Any excess damage goes to the affected hit location.
• Normal* - Damage equal to weapon AP is parried. Any excess damage goes to the affected hit location. Parrying weapon takes 1 AP damage if damage more than its current AP. 
• Fail - Missed defense
• Fumble - Missed defense, roll on Fumbles Table

* Successful Parry versus Failed Attack: Roll parrying weapon normal damage. Attacking weapon's AP is reduced by any damage over current AP

It was a lot more straight forward.
 

 

Edited May 13, 2022 by DreadDomain

[DreadDomain]

On 5/10/2022 at 11:25 PM, PhilHibbs said:

There are two different official versions of the combat results table anyway, so inventing your own third version is entirely within the spirit of the rules.

Yes, and both are wrong! 😄

[coffeemancer]

radical idea: dodging can make you move in a direction. either randomly or dependent on hit location or somesuch.

[smiorgan]

On 5/14/2022 at 1:11 AM, DreadDomain said:

 

To ignore the table, it is easier to use combat results from RQ3 since your attack result is not "downgraded" by the defense result. If you rolled a special attack, you can roll your special damage. The defense result will determine how much gets through and how affected the weapons are:

 

Yes. You are entirely right. It's the "downgrade" thing that makes the table necessary. When I run RQG for newbies coming from D&D5 - something I might be doing soon - I might go for RQ3's no downgrade approach, which seems simpler to handle.