Basic roleplaying combat system

[Atgxtg]

Seems like the game designers loved axes and hated shields

More like they loved streamlining a bit too much and ported over some dysfunctional rules from Elric! Originally (by that I mean in RuneQuest), swords had other advantages over axes (better hit points/armor points, impale ability, lower ENC) that balanced things out. Likewise in original RuneQuest shields were the best parry weapon due to thier having the highest Hit Points/Armor points (in fact in original RQ, shields didn't break like other weapons), and the best starting percentages. But when the authors of Elric! tried to streamline the weapon hit point/armor point system, they inadvertently nerfed shields.

[axe-elf]

Well, THAT weapon should have the stats of the broadsword or better the bastard sword, NOT the long sword listed in the BGB. It is your game, but I see no point whatsoever in nerfing the battleaxe to the point of making it useless against an armoured foe just because you have mistaken the entry for the slashing renaissance sword for the weapon of choice of the Vikings.

If you want a good representation of Viking equipment, try Mythic Iceland or Vikings of Legend.

So MI has equipment also. Interesting. I was planning to manage without it and make my own world.

Anyway, I was going to use broad sword for the viking sword. Then it does +1 more damage than the battle axe, and is worth extra investment. It is absolutely not a bastard sword; no space for two hands. Viking sword - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And axe is never useless against armored foe, I don´t understand where you get that from. There are damage bonuses and there are special hits, and If you need to roll max with +2 to hurt anyone, he is heavily protected anyway.

Edited September 2, 2012 by axe-elf

[Atgxtg]

Vikings for RQ3 could be helpful too.

It has both the broadsword and bastard sword, and also a Viking Round Shield with 10 AP (in RQ3 a buckler has 8AP, Heater/Round Shield 12, Kite Shield 16 and Hoplite 18). In RQ3, shields stop damage up to their AP rating. Damage greater than the AP rating gets through, ans also reduces the shield by 1 AP. If someone deliberately attack the shield then any damage past the AP do damage directly tot he shield AP on a 1 for one basis.

Come to think of it RQ3 solves most of the things that you don't seem to like in BRP.

[soltakss]

Come to think of it RQ3 solves most of the things that you don't seem to like in BRP.

Almost always the case

[Atgxtg]

Almost always the case

Yeah. If I were to run a BRP campaign, I'd probably start with RQ3 as the base, and then port over anything else I needed from BRP rather than run BRP.

Some of the optical rules in BRP are not as accessible as they are in RQ. For instance, I like category modifiers, and the RQ character sheet breaks up skills by category, while the standard BRP sheet does not. It's a small difference but it makes running with the modifiers a lot easier. Plus BRP Gold is chuck full of outdated RQ2 era things that were dropped or improved later on. One of the reasons why some of the rule systems don't mix is that they were created under different assumptions. For instance there are at least five different SIZ scales cobbled into BRP (RQ2, Strombringer, RQ3, CoC, and a new one used exclusively for vehicles over SIZ 100). THat makes it hard to come up with benchmark figures. With RQ3 there is only 1 SIZ table.

[RosenMcStern]

With RQ3 there is only 1 SIZ table.

And only one genre supported.

By the way, there is a guy over there at rpg.net complaining that he lacks a price list for BRP. Anyone volunteering to direct him to Basic Gamemastering monograph?

[Atgxtg]

And only one genre supported.

Which was hardly due to the SIZ table.

In fact, the multiple SIZ tables don;'t cause problems if you game in that one genre. It's the multiple genres that leads to needing higher SIZ scores. . A player can very easily pick a SIZ value from one SIZ scale in the book, and the GM could be reading off another SIZ scale in a different section.

And it is not hard to port over specfic sub systems from BRP in RQ3 to expand it to handle other genres. I really think the BRP Gold book works best as a supplement for existing Chasoium RPGs.

By the way, there is a guy over there at rpg.net complaining that he lacks a price list for BRP. Anyone volunteering to direct him to Basic Gamemastering monograph?

Not me. That's too much to ask someone shell out for just a price list. Pity they didn't release the price tables as a 4-6 page supplement for BRP. Kinda of ironic that will all the optional rules in BRP we didn't get an optional price list.

[SDLeary]

And only one genre supported.

Only one supported but like any other version of BRP, more playable. I have played differing genres with RQ3, and it arguably works better than some other iterations of BRP. This all pre BGB though.

Firearms info pulled in from Delta Green frex allows a good gritty modern/modern horror/zombies/post-apoc game.

SDLeary

[NickMiddleton]

...But when the authors of Elric! tried to streamline the weapon hit point/armor point system, they inadvertently nerfed shields.

Ehn? What? Re-read the Elric! Shield and Parry rules carefully - shields may not be quite as good as they were in RQIII but they are still SIGNIFICANTLY better for parrying with than an off hand weapon (and MILES better than an improvised weapon).

There are some subtleties to the Elric! shield / parrying rules that were buried in footnotes that aren't in the BGB - either because of complexity or over sight, you'd have to ask Jason - I missed that they HADN'T come across because I wasn't paying close enough attention when I was play testing, which is why the first time we had this debate I was very confused...

Cheers,

Nick

[Philotomy]

Are the (optional) Strike Rank rules in the gold book the same as the RQ3 rules? I'm thinking maybe the gold book's strike rank multiple attacks rules are different. Is that correct? If so, where did the gold book's strike rank multiple attack rule come from?

[Baron]

Thank you very much. I like improving my English by learning new terms.

Yes. I first bought the pdf and, one or two years later, I also bought the hard cover book.

Actually, I didn't knew there was some differences. Until today, I believed both editions were absolutely identical...

So, I compared them a bit more. I don't have the time to compare the two whole books but I still rapidly did it for the Chapter "Combat" (the topic of this thread); I also looked for the errata (with the pdf: "Basic Roleplaying Corrections").

The errata changes have been made; thus the pdf "Basic Roleplaying Corrctions" becomes obsolete if you have the 2011 hard cover second edition.

And for combats, I didn't notice any other change than the Parry paragraph, page 191. Note that I just looked quickly at each paragraph to see whether they changed. I didn't read them carefully. So, I may be wrong. Now each other page of the Combat chapter looks strictly identical.

Beautiful. Just checked, and I have the First Edition.

[RosenMcStern]

Are the (optional) Strike Rank rules in the gold book the same as the RQ3 rules? I'm thinking maybe the gold book's strike rank multiple attacks rules are different. Is that correct? If so, where did the gold book's strike rank multiple attack rule come from?

Exactly. That detail is different. I do not know where it comes from, but it is the only bad rule in a 400-page book. The rule says that a clumsy DEX 3 troll of SIZ 20 with a Troll Maul (SR 1) can strike twice per round, whereas a quick halfling with short arms and a dagger attacks less often. Imagine the scene

[Atgxtg]

Exactly. That detail is different. I do not know where it comes from, but it is the only bad rule in a 400-page book. The rule says that a clumsy DEX 3 troll of SIZ 20 with a Troll Maul (SR 1) can strike twice per round, whereas a quick halfling with short arms and a dagger attacks less often. Imagine the scene

There are a few other bad rules in there. But mostly cobbled from other RPGs. The chase rules, designed for CoC, don't really hold up well.

[Atgxtg]

Ehn? What? Re-read the Elric! Shield and Parry rules carefully - shields may not be quite as good as they were in RQIII but they are still SIGNIFICANTLY better for parrying with than an off hand weapon (and MILES better than an improvised weapon).

There are some subtleties to the Elric! shield / parrying rules that were buried in footnotes that aren't in the BGB - either because of complexity or over sight, you'd have to ask Jason - I missed that they HADN'T come across because I wasn't paying close enough attention when I was play testing, which is why the first time we had this debate I was very confused...

Subleties? More like contradictions. The notes don;t work the same was as the rules, and depending on where you look, a parrying weapon is either damaged or not. I remember stopping an Elric session in mid-combat while we went over the contradictory parry matrix.

RQ3 had a similar discrepancy between the damage/healing rules in the book, and the ones in the reference sheets.

[Philotomy]

Exactly. That detail is different. I do not know where it comes from, but it is the only bad rule in a 400-page book. The rule says that a clumsy DEX 3 troll of SIZ 20 with a Troll Maul (SR 1) can strike twice per round, whereas a quick halfling with short arms and a dagger attacks less often. Imagine the scene

Yeah, I think I prefer the RQ3 rules for multiple attacks.

[vagabond]

Subleties? More like contradictions. The notes don;t work the same was as the rules, and depending on where you look, a parrying weapon is either damaged or not. I remember stopping an Elric session in mid-combat while we went over the contradictory parry matrix.

In Elric!, shields are much better than weapons when parrying. Only parrying weapons lose HP when parrying a critical attack and the parry is a success. Shields do not lose HP this way. Also, if a single blow's damage exceeds a weapon's HP by at least 1 HP, the weapon breaks. A shield only loses the excess HP, and will not break until a single blow's damage causes the shield's HP to reach 0.

[axe-elf]

Question:

Is shield skill and the melee weapon skill treated separately when it comes to the cumulative -30% for multiple parries?

So that you could first parry with the sword, and then parry with the shield in the same round, without -30% to the shield skill?

[RosenMcStern]

Answer: no. Even if you change your defense technique, including Dodge, the -30% stays. Only if you go all-out defense you can do the first two defensive rolls at full %ile (and one must be a Dodge) and then suffer the cumulative penalty from the third defense roll.

Of course you could rule that when you have two weapons you can parry with both at full %ile, too. But this should be possible only on an all-out defense maneuver.

[axe-elf]

Answer: no. Even if you change your defense technique, including Dodge, the -30% stays. Only if you go all-out defense you can do the first two defensive rolls at full %ile (and one must be a Dodge) and then suffer the cumulative penalty from the third defense roll.

Of course you could rule that when you have two weapons you can parry with both at full %ile, too. But this should be possible only on an all-out defense maneuver.

Ok, thanks!

[axe-elf]

Brings me to another question:

Is there any good explanation why it is not possible to dodge and parry in the same round (except when you go all defencive)?

It seems to me unrealistic and contraintuitive. And there is no real advantage to be able to both parry and dodge in the same round.

[Atgxtg]

Brings me to another question:

Is there any good explanation why it is not possible to dodge and parry in the same round (except when you go all defencive)? [/quote\

Yes, because that gives the defender two defense skills vs. one skill for the attacker. If you are using the riposte option, the defenses will still be reasonable long after the attack skill drops to nothing.

Yeah, there is an advantage, much better defense. Once again, RQ3 allowed both in the same round, but at the expense of attacking, and RQ3 didn't have the riposte option or a way for an attacker to get multiple attacks with with same melee weapon against a single foe.

[Atgxtg]

In Elric!, shields are much better than weapons when parrying. Only parrying weapons lose HP when parrying a critical attack and the parry is a success. Shields do not lose HP this way. Also, if a single blow's damage exceeds a weapon's HP by at least 1 HP, the weapon breaks. A shield only loses the excess HP, and will not break until a single blow's damage causes the shield's HP to reach 0.

I wish my book wasn't 1300 miles away. There is some contradictory stuff on parrying in thr Elric rules, and I think itis in BRP, too-so I'll check my gold book.

[vagabond]

I wish my book wasn't 1300 miles away. There is some contradictory stuff on parrying in thr Elric rules, and I think itis in BRP, too-so I'll check my gold book.

The info I posted came after I pulled my Elric! book for reference. I was pretty sure shields were much better at parrying in Elric!, and wanted to ensure I was pulling the correct info. I do know that the asterisked and italicized info at the bottom of the matrix in Elric! was vague if not incorrect altogether, but the actual result entries in the matrix as well as in the text are very clear and I find no contradictions (other than the asterisked/italicized blurb).

I have not checked Stormbringer 5th yet to see if the Elric! rules passed through unscathed in this regard, or if some changes were made.

Ian

[RosenMcStern]

Is there any good explanation why it is not possible to dodge and parry in the same round (except when you go all defencive)?

Yes, there is. It is the basic assumption of BRP, that what you do in a round you decide at the beginning and carry on for the rest of the round. Once you have opted for Parry, it will be Parry for the rest of the round. This is somehow negated by the Fighting Defensively option, but that is an exceptional situation.

BRP is a simple ruleset and it has several viable options in it. But it does rely on some basic assumptions that you have to "grok" before you master it. This one, that you DO NOT make decisions DEX Rank by DEX Rank but go with a previously determined strategy, is rather important.

[axe-elf]

Hmmm.. I don´t get it. First i don´t find any rules for riposte. Do you mean attack after a parry? The attack is unaffected by the cumulative -30% as I understand the rules.

Even if the defender has two skills, he can only use one of them against any one attack.

I don´t see any advantage.

For example, using cumulative -30%, if defender has dodge 70% and melee attack/parry 50%:

Dodge chance of 70, 40 and 10%, is still better than say parry 50 and dodge 40%. Or parry 50, parry 20 and dodge 10%.

Using the best skill all the way is always the best choice, but one do not have to impose it on the players.