Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
lawrence.whitaker

The Design Mechanism and the Future of RuneQuest

Recommended Posts

Concerning Combat Actions, a distinction existed in MRQ1 between Actions (attacks, spell casting and so on) and Reactions (parry and dodge, essentially).

I'd like to see CA as the maximum number of Actions and Reactions per turn (as it is the case in MRQ2, actually).

Yet, I'd like to see Actions to be more restricted, for instance with a cumulative malus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to see CA as the maximum number of Actions and Reactions per turn (as it is the case in MRQ2, actually).

Yet, I'd like to see Actions to be more restricted, for instance with a cumulative malus.

I can see the problem that at the moment in MRQ2 when you outnumber an enemy, everyone gets 3 attacks and just about anything short of a giant or large dragon goes down in the first round.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see the problem that at the moment in MRQ2 when you outnumber an enemy, everyone gets 3 attacks and just about anything short of a giant or large dragon goes down in the first round.

Well, anyone outnumbering ANYTHING on RuneQuest was always that way; last night we were playtesting RetroQuest, and mooks with 75% (the lowest combat skill is 187% for my character!) kicked the crap out of it. They were about 20 vs 3 + some hirelings, we (i) fumbled our stealth roll and turned our ambush into an all out melee. It was very fun though!

On RQ it would have been way, way worse, since instead of -30% per parry you have to split, so preety much unless the monster has 500% skill it gets quite a few free strikes. Since MRQII is more survivable, i don't see how that could be a problem per se!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With 3 players, it could take 5 hits or more all to the same location, that's way worse than RQ3 which would only be 2 hits if it parries one.

On RQ3 3 players attacking a single opponent would all attack twice (even if the 2nd attack is a punch) minus the one parrying, and then, they would all cast a spell or 2 at it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thinking about all of this, I came across this line in Rick Marshall's blog (Oaths and Fates). He's been outlining how Wizards of the Coast started;

"What many organizations fail to realize is that the very best professionals feel stifled in organizations that focus on delivering the minimum quality for the maximum return and long for the chance to do their best work."

Seems an apt point for Mongoose to take note of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see the problem that at the moment in MRQ2 when you outnumber an enemy, everyone gets 3 attacks and just about anything short of a giant or large dragon goes down in the first round.

Yes, and that's why I suggested a limit on actions/attacks.

It could be a limitation to 1 action per round, a -25% malus per action over the first, or anything else.

Simply said, a standard round of action for a 3 CA character would be 1 attack and 2 parries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, and that's why I suggested a limit on actions/attacks.

It could be a limitation to 1 action per round, a -25% malus per action over the first, or anything else.

Simply said, a standard round of action for a 3 CA character would be 1 attack and 2 parries.

Please explain why someone has to be able to hold off many people at once. In real life, anyone has a very hard time fighting two people, and 3 vs 1 is almost always a guaranteed win for the 3. 4 or 5 vs. 1 is "run or die".

I don't see why you cant just pit a party vs. a party instead of 4 people against a superior opponent. Big, mythical creatures already have a ton of HP and high armor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Big, mythical creatures already have a ton of HP and high armor.

I remember the time when playing RQ I realised the true scope of the strength and damage inflicted by giants; "You have been hit. You are squashed beyond recognition".

I can see why some who are used to a D&D background (eg: HP tank characters) might have a hard time adjusting their strategies and tactics to a system such as RQ.

This is one reason why I like a BRP/RQ type of damage system/scale. There may be added risks for character longevity, but this potentially leads to more creative and "realistic" problem solving (even when using some of the BRP options to soften impact on characters [sIZ+CON]). Just like "Saving Private Ryan". ;D

Edited by dragonewt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rurik? Trolkin!

Yup. What he said. :(

Great news really. Congrats Loz and Pete. MRQ2 introduced the best and most revolutionary mechanic to the RQ/BRP rules with Combat Maneuvers since the d100.

I have high hopes for RQ6 allowed to be developed as a true Labor of Love rather than rushed to meet external pressures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On RQ3 3 players attacking a single opponent would all attack twice (even if the 2nd attack is a punch) minus the one parrying, and then, they would all cast a spell or 2 at it.

That's... extreme, maybe impossible. You can hit on SR1 if you are huge and have a greatsword but SR4 is more common. Second attack (kick or headbutt, as he has a greatsword in his hands) 3SR later, then 3+DEXSR+points to prepare and cast Disruption, the mountain with the great sword could get his first spell off on SR9 but no more, and that's with huge SIZ and DEX.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's... extreme, maybe impossible. You can hit on SR1 if you are huge and have a greatsword but SR4 is more common. Second attack (kick or headbutt, as he has a greatsword in his hands) 3SR later, then 3+DEXSR+points to prepare and cast Disruption, the mountain with the great sword could get his first spell off on SR9 but no more, and that's with huge SIZ and DEX.

Strike rank 1

Cast divine spell (thunderbolt, lightning, sever spirit, whatever)

Allied spirit casts divine spell

Attack as normal (with two weapons you get your full % chance at... lets say SR 2 for siz, 1 for dex, 2 for a sword) = 5 and 8.

Option 2:

Cast divine spell

cast spirit spells x2

Edit: Also i find really, REALLY stupid that andre the giant with a greatsword can *hit more times* than jet li with a dagger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a suggestion in RQ2 that SIZ SR should only count for the first blow, IIRC, and once melee was joined only DEX was important. SIZ SR also breaks down with non-humanoid critters. Still haven't found a satisfactory (elegant) solution to this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a suggestion in RQ2 that SIZ SR should only count for the first blow, IIRC, and once melee was joined only DEX was important. SIZ SR also breaks down with non-humanoid critters. Still haven't found a satisfactory (elegant) solution to this.

I did. Its called "getting rid of that stupid characteristic" =)

Really, siz serves no function at all; a size category like... every other game out there works better

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a suggestion in RQ2 that SIZ SR should only count for the first blow, IIRC, and once melee was joined only DEX was important. SIZ SR also breaks down with non-humanoid critters. Still haven't found a satisfactory (elegant) solution to this.

I like a general mechanic that accounts for "being inside" an opponent's space. Eg: With dagger vs long spear, the spear would have a bonus, however, after the dagger managed to hit/parry and generally get withing the spear space, then the advantage would go to the dagger (etc...). This could even be accounted for with hand-to-hand martial arts; same effect but within a smaller space. Tactics and general fighting skill would be also be used to change the advantage.

Action! System has a good general example for this type of rule. I generally house-rule it with BRP/RQ, ORE (a modifier to the initiative component) and other systems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For years we had two SR for weapons to simulate close and distanced melee. It worked okay, but were were mad young gamers then. We also had different armour values against cutting, thrusting and smashing attacks at the time (inspired by WoW), so I wouldn't take anything we did as a practical solution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive always rationlised that someone with larger SIZ would not give up the reach advantage, and constantly move to keep that advantage and thus retain the SIZ strike rank in combat.

As a side note, I find the success of BRP (at least with me and my group) are the way its rules work in a very logical fashion. Any rules that work in illogical and abstract way spoil the system imo. And Combat Maneuvers is one of those rules that are abstract in the way they are implemented (as is using charisma as a measurable statistic when there is already social skills but thats another point :P)

I look forward to whatever The Design Mechanism produces however, as more Runequest can never be a bad thing (Even if i dont use the core rules there will be pleanty of suppliments that i can use :))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What probably needs to be done is, like characters/creatures where SIZ and DEX affect SR, weapons should also have a SIZ (Reach) and DEX (Speed) that affects SR.

That way the rules would work as intended - a larger combatant with a weapon with considerable reach (Andre the Giant and claymore) would get an advantage in the initial attack (acting first due to improved reach), but since the claymore is slower and, relatively speaking, Andre has a slower reaction time/speed than Jet Li, Jet with his superior DEX and dagger with its superior speed would then have more opportunities to strike. I also believe that while you can use the optional Strike Rank system to determine initial Strike Rank, you might still want to use the rule from the normal DEX based system to determine how many actions a character can have (i.e. DEX determines this regardless of SIZ, or again, use character DEX plus weapon Speed).

Might have to work on such a system ...

Ian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive always rationlised that someone with larger SIZ would not give up the reach advantage, and constantly move to keep that advantage and thus retain the SIZ strike rank in combat.

The issue here is that someone with the larger size does NOT always have a greater reach. Who has the greater reach? A SIZ 11 human, or a SIZ 12 Dwarf? Same for stride. Even in R/L this is an issue, between us humans that is.

SDLeary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue here is that someone with the larger size does NOT always have a greater reach. Who has the greater reach? A SIZ 11 human, or a SIZ 12 Dwarf? Same for stride. Even in R/L this is an issue, between us humans that is.

SDLeary

I'm convinced that the RQ3 model of strike ranks is rather "flawed," because it rolls into a single number dexterity, size, and weapon length. I also don't like that it leaves out intelligence, and I was glad to see that MRQII rolled that into the initiative mix. I think you have to take into account the speed of the mind as well as the speed of the body, although I would think that both of those are dwarfed by the importance of skill/experience. For my money, who goes first has to depend at least somewhat on who is the most talented.

Size and weapon length have nothing to do with who can initiate an action; indeed, to the extent that a big weapon might be more bulky and harder to maneuver, a long weapon may even be slower than a small one. So who initiates an action should really just depend on speed of body and mind, with the additional factor of the wielder's skill level. Having a longer weapon is no guarantee of always hitting first. If you want some evidence for that, you can find videos on youtube of the Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto Ryu kata involving sword versus naginata (glaive), and sword versus short sword. It's clear that the combatant with the shorter weapon has to do something about the longer reach of his opponent's weapon; but it is equally clear that he is able to do things about it, including parrying offensively to move the opponent's weapon off line.

In my not-at-all-humble opinion, I would say that the best way to do initiative would be to base who gets to initiate an action just on speed (mind, body, skill) and then take into account things like SIZ and weapon length when deciding what he can do with his initiative. That is, the combatant with the sword may have initiative on the combatant with the spear, but the fact that the spear is longer presents an obstacle the swordsman has to get around to do something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Splitting SIZ into Height and Weight solves the reach question, but it adds yet another layer of complexity.

Speaking of SIZ, thanks to Gianni for pointing this out on Google+: http://anthropology.lbcc.edu/handoutsdocs/mistake.pdf

Looks like the hsunchen have just grown 6 inches on the SIZ equivalency tables!

There's another interesting twist to height: when cultures started to urbanize, average height dropped significantly because food was more scarce in the city (and perhaps more diseases as well).

Edited by Smoking Frog
can't spell

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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...