Lets Make Parrying More Interesting

[French Desperate WindChild]

16 hours ago, Shiningbrow said:

I find that silly. I think you should be able to - but it will come at a cost - time.

So, for me, someone can do 2 of 3 things - attack, parry, or cast non-Rune magic spells.

It's very silly to say that Rune magic takes  effect on SR 1, but then they can't do anything else except parry or dodge for the rest of the round.

we are not in an "action points system" (I would prefer, for sure), but in a round system and initiative.

With this model, I don't consider "silly" the rune magic rule : It is just that  (your spell is before everything) + (open the gate is so hard that you can't do anything else before the next round 😃   too tired, need to focus again, etc...)

 

If we were in action points system, I would be happy to have "some action points before the spell effect and some action points after the spell effect too

same if we had some specific fighting actions (you can't do anything the next 3 act pts after you touch your ennemy)

 

so don"t consider the rule model as the simulation or the explanation of the effect, just a model to resolve situation with dices.

[PhilHibbs]

In my game I allow self-targeted spells to be cast in addition to an attack.

[icebrand]

3 hours ago, French Desperate WindChild said:

we are not in an "action points system" (I would prefer, for sure), but in a round system and initiative.

With this model, I don't consider "silly" the rune magic rule : It is just that  (your spell is before everything) + (open the gate is so hard that you can't do anything else before the next round 😃   too tired, need to focus again, etc...)

 

If we were in action points system, I would be happy to have "some action points before the spell effect and some action points after the spell effect too

same if we had some specific fighting actions (you can't do anything the next 3 act pts after you touch your ennemy)

 

so don"t consider the rule model as the simulation or the explanation of the effect, just a model to resolve situation with dices.

Wait, you can't cast runemagic and attack? I play it like this:

If you cast rune magic you can't cast battle (except extension)

If you cast an attack spell (battle/spirit or rune) then you can't attack.

Changing from weapon to spell focus (or back) is +5sr, but weapon enchanting spells use the weapon as Focus (no extra SR).

 

Edited May 13, 2022 by icebrand

[PhilHibbs]

5 hours ago, icebrand said:

Wait, you can't cast runemagic and attack?

Officially no you can't.

5 hours ago, icebrand said:

If you cast rune magic you can't cast battle (except extension)

That makes no sense, if you're casting Extension then you're also casting another Rune spell.

5 hours ago, icebrand said:

If you cast an attack spell (battle/spirit or rune) then you can't attack.

Changing from weapon to spell focus (or back) is +5sr, but weapon enchanting spells use the weapon as Focus (no extra SR).

Makes sense to me.

[icebrand]

3 minutes ago, PhilHibbs said:

Officially no you can't.

Can't find it in the book, what's the page? You could in previous editions!

4 minutes ago, PhilHibbs said:

That makes no sense, if you're casting Extension then you're also casting another Rune spell.

I forgot that you can't extend spirit magic (you can extend battle in 2, thats where the quote crawled from)

[PhilHibbs]

2 hours ago, icebrand said:

Can't find it in the book, what's the page? You could in previous editions!

I quoted it earlier. p.195:

Quote

While an adventurer might throw a spell at an oncoming foe and then engage that foe in combat within the same round, an adventurer cannot, while engaged in combat, attack both physically and magically.
This means that an adventurer who starts a round physically engaged in melee may either:

• Attack and defend normally; or
• Defend normally and cast spells.

Thus, within a melee, an adventurer’s strike rank indicates when they may initiate an attack. However, the adventurer is performing that attack for the entire round and can do little else except parry or Dodge.

So whilst the paragraph could be interpreted as allowing it, the bullets and subsequent paragraph make it clear that you cannot.

Edited May 13, 2022 by PhilHibbs

[icebrand]

Just now, PhilHibbs said:

I quoted it earlier. p.195:

So whilst the paragraph could be interpreted as allowing it, the bullets make it clear that you cannot.

Id go with the paragraph, which plays the same as earlier editions.

Your interpretation is like BRP4e, but there it says very clearly you can't combine.

Maybe @Jeffcan answer this authoritatively (is that a word?)

[PhilHibbs]

5 minutes ago, icebrand said:

Maybe Jeff can answer this authoritatively (is that a word?)

What's what the Q&A thread is for.

[Bill the barbarian]

34 minutes ago, PhilHibbs said:

While an adventurer might throw a spell at an oncoming foe and then engage that foe in combat within the same round, an adventurer cannot, while engaged in combat, attack both physically and magically.

If I recall a lonnnnngggggg thread from a while back where many of the denizens hereabout tried to figure this out, the key word is engaged (emphasized above by moi). Unengaged one can do many things, like cast a spell and then wait to engage (as above) and with enough SRs left can then attack and defend (defending requires no SRs) as per normal. 

12 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

In my game I allow self-targeted spells to be cast in addition to an attack.

I seem to recall this being thing as well and if the spells happened to be aimed at a weapon the focus could be on it saving the need to change a weapon for a focus (and 5 SRs, as well).

Edited May 13, 2022 by Bill the barbarian

[icebrand]

1 hour ago, Bill the barbarian said:

If I recall a lonnnnngggggg thread from a while back where many of the denizens hereabout tried to figure this out, the key word is engaged (emphasized above by moi). Unengaged one can do many things, like cast a spell and then wait to engage (as above) and with enough SRs left can then attack and defend (defending requires no SRs) as per normal. 

I seem to recall this being thing as well and if the spells happened to be aimed at a weapon the focus could be on it saving the need to change a weapon for a focus (and 5 SRs, as well).

Spellcasting then engaging is another stuff.

In RQ2, you can cast+attack or cast an attack spell.

In RQ3 i can't  remember.

In any case, i wouldnt worry too much about it, both variants have been used for decades, so just pick whatever you like and run with it, nothing will break!

Edited May 13, 2022 by icebrand

[DreadDomain]

On 5/13/2022 at 7:07 AM, PhilHibbs said:

 

Quote

While an adventurer might throw a spell at an oncoming foe and then engage that foe in combat within the same round, an adventurer cannot, while engaged in combat, attack both physically and magically.
This means that an adventurer who starts a round physically engaged in melee may either:

• Attack and defend normally; or
• Defend normally and cast spells (edited to add: to attack).

My understanding has always been that while engaged, you are simply limited to one attack action. You can cast spells like Bladesharp or Heal (yourself or others) or Truesword or Berserk (they are not attacking a target) and attack in the same round. You can't cast Sever Spirit or Thunderbolt and attack in the same round since it would constitute 2 attacks.

[icebrand]

39 minutes ago, DreadDomain said:

My understanding has always been that while engaged, you are simply limited to one attack action. You can cast spells like Bladesharp or Heal (yourself or others) or Truesword or Berserk (they are not attacking a target) and attack in the same round. You can't cast Sever Spirit or Thunderbolt and attack in the same round since it would constitute 2 attacks.

Same here!

[DreadDomain]

On 5/11/2022 at 7:29 AM, PhilHibbs said:

Combat in RuneQuest often descends into a stale repetition of attack-parry-attack-parry.

Combat in movies is an ever-changing dynamic situation with feints, over-extended swings, shield bashes, kicks and throws.

Try as I might, I can't think of a reason to ever shield bash or kick someone in a RuneQuest combat, unless for some strange reason I have an unusually high skill in one of those two things.

Occasionally someone will get a really good parry result against a failed or mediocre attack, and then the attacker's weapon is damaged and possibly broken. Then the attacker has to do something different, but mostly this will be just taking a round or a strike rank delay to draw another weapon. The same routine resumes but with a second-choice weapon.

MRQ2 / RQ6 / Mythras "solve" this by giving special actions, but in my experience this was pretty much invariably "Headshot!"

My idea is this: give an occasional game mechanical push in the direction of doing something different. Here's a quick off-the-cuff starter.

One relatively simple way to do this would be to replace the fairly humdrum benefits of a really good parry with something more diverse like a Parry Results table.

"Roll parrying weapon’s normal damage, attacking weapon’s HP is reduced by 1 HP if damage over its current HP" remains as it is. It's a small effect, and I don't want to magnify it.

"Roll parrying weapon’s special damage, attacking weapon’s HP is reduced by any damage over its current HP" is replaced by "Roll once on the Parry Results table".

"Roll parrying weapon’s special damage, attacking weapon’s HP reduced by the damage rolled" is replaced by "Roll twice on the Parry Results table, reroll duplicate result".

So next up is the Parry Results table. What could go in that...

01-10 Attacking weapon HP reduced by normal parrying weapon damage over its current HP.
11-20 Attacking weapon HP reduced by normal parrying weapon damage.
21-30 Attacking weapon HP reduced by special parrying weapon damage over its current HP.
31-40 Attacking weapon HP reduced by special parrying weapon damage.
41-50 Defender may make an additional attack with their parrying weapon on the next SR.
51-60 Defender gains +30% to their parrying weapon skill for the remainder of the melee round plus 1D2 more rounds.
61-70 Attacking weapon cannot be used to attack for remainder of the melee round plus 1D2 more rounds.
71-80 Attacker is disarmed, weapon is thrown 1D3 meters, roll 1D8 for direction. For unarmed attacks, the attack cannot be used for the current plus 1D4 melee rounds (stunned, numb).
81-90 Attacker unbalanced, reduce all Agility and Manipulation skills by 20% for the remainder of and the next melee round.
91-00 Attacker knocked back. Roll defender's STR vs attacker's SIZ. If successful, knock back is 1D6 meters, otherwise 1 meter.

Some of those options force the attacker to do something different. Bash, kick, magic, flee.

It reminds me a bit of something we tried a quarter of a century ago to make RQ3 combat more dynamic.

Instead of having a successful Parry versus Failed Attack reducing attacking weapon's AP by any damage over current AP, we made it dependent on the parry success. It was kind of a mix of Riposte (from Stormbringer if I recall) and the RQ3 rule. It went something like this (fuzzy memory applies):

Parry results vs failed attack    
Critical    Roll parrying weapon normal damage. Attacking weapon's AP is reduced by any damage over current AP. Defender gets an immediate opportunity melee
Special    Roll parrying weapon normal damage. Attacking weapon's AP is reduced by 1 AP if damage exceeds current AP. Defender gets an immediate opportunity melee
Normal    Roll parrying weapon normal damage. Attacking weapon's AP is reduced by 1 AP if damage exceeds current AP.
Fail          Missed defense
Fumble    Missed defense, roll on Fumbles Table

We were not too impressed by the "only 1 attack per 12 seconds" (really, that slow!?) and wanted to use the opportunity melee rule a bit more. Using this rule, it also meant we were allowing multiple parries and dodges in a round (I can't recall if we specifically applied the -30% per extra defense as per Stormbringer but I think not)

Edited May 14, 2022 by DreadDomain

[Kloster]

20 hours ago, icebrand said:

In RQ2, you can cast+attack or cast an attack spell.

In RQ3 i can't  remember.

In RQ3, you could do pretty much what you wanted as long as you had SR.

[PhilHibbs]

23 hours ago, DreadDomain said:

My understanding has always been that while engaged, you are simply limited to one attack action. You can cast spells like Bladesharp or Heal (yourself or others) or Truesword or Berserk (they are not attacking a target) and attack in the same round. You can't cast Sever Spirit or Thunderbolt and attack in the same round since it would constitute 2 attacks.

I'm sure a lot of people run it that way, I do, but it isn't RQG RAW.

[DreadDomain]

58 minutes ago, PhilHibbs said:

I'm sure a lot of people run it that way, I do, but it isn't RQG RAW.

I think it is RAW. But it might have been clarified otherwise somewhere else (The Well) but to be honest, I have a hard time to keep up with all the clarifications.

I am 95% certain this is also how it was played in the Jeff's White Bull campaign (which doesn't make it automatically RAW of course)

[Shiningbrow]

10 hours ago, Kloster said:

In RQ3, you could do pretty much what you wanted as long as you had SR.

That's how I'd run it.

On 5/13/2022 at 4:00 PM, French Desperate WindChild said:

we are not in an "action points system" (I would prefer, for sure), but in a round system and initiative.

Except when it is...

[Shiningbrow]

On 5/14/2022 at 8:36 AM, DreadDomain said:

We were not too impressed by the "only 1 attack per 12 seconds" (really, that slow!?)

Theoretically,  no. It's supposed to represent all the faints, dodges, thrusts,  slashes, parties, etc that happened within those 12 seconds.  Not simply an individual attack / parry.

I think this is why I want to go with Action Points... some people are clearly more capable of moving and acting more often (reach & reflex), and others slower.

[PhilHibbs]

10 hours ago, DreadDomain said:

I think it is RAW. But it might have been clarified otherwise somewhere else (The Well) but to be honest, I have a hard time to keep up with all the clarifications.

I quoted the rule twice in this thread. It's entirely explicit.

[DreadDomain]

2 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

I quoted the rule twice in this thread. It's entirely explicit.

It's actually not. The first part does not quite say the same thing as the second part. Which part is right? You read these two bits and you come to a conclusion. I read them and I come to another.

Mind you, I am not saying you are wrong and recognise your interpretation is as good as mine and possibly correct.

[DreadDomain]

7 hours ago, Shiningbrow said:

Theoretically,  no. It's supposed to represent all the faints, dodges, thrusts,  slashes, parties, etc that happened within those 12 seconds.  Not simply an individual attack / parry.

I think this is why I want to go with Action Points... some people are clearly more capable of moving and acting more often (reach & reflex), and others slower.

You are correct. To be more accurate we were not too impressed that all the faints, dodges, thrusts, slashes, parties, etc that happened within those 12 seconds were encapsulated in a single attack roll.

[PhilHibbs]

5 hours ago, DreadDomain said:

You are correct. To be more accurate we were not too impressed that all the faints, dodges, thrusts, slashes, parties, etc that happened within those 12 seconds were encapsulated in a single attack roll.

That's part of what I'm doing with my first post in this thread. One more die roll to give the results of a really good parry. Really good attacks give a nice result, that incorporates variety (mainly through hit location, requiring another die roll), so lets give great parrying a little spice with a die roll too!

[PhilHibbs]

Going back to the combat results table, there is some talk at the moment about ditching it and getting rid of the "downgrade" element. Maybe I should go with that for my parry table house rule, and just say a critical parry gives two rolls on the table, and a special parry gives one. So you could simultaneously hurt your opponent with your attack, and be disarmed or knocked off balance at the same time.

[Orlanthatemyhamster]

On 5/11/2022 at 8:34 PM, Kloster said:

Just use RQ3's combat rules and all your problems are solved ... if your players decide to read the rules and to use them. You will then have pushes, close in, attack to disarm or to destroy weapon or shield, knockback (intentional or not), moves interweaved with attacks to attack from side or back, etc.

I like them, but I wouldn't say, 'solved'.

[Kloster]

38 minutes ago, Orlanthatemyhamster said:

I like them, but I wouldn't say, 'solved'.

I should have written that 'all OP's described problems are solved'.