RQ 2 Fireblade query

[Byrom]

I posted this in the Facebook RQ page, but there was not a lot of feedback, so any help appreciated:-

RuneQuest 2 (c1980 GW under license from Chaosium) A question for the Rule Lawyers: The spell Fireblade, on the inside cover of the rule book there are a set of clarifications, corrections and Additions which state:

Page 38

" Fireblade - An impaling blow with a Firebladed weapon does the full damage of the weapon (11 points for a 2 H spear, for instance) plus the normal 3D6 damage of the Fireblade. The damage from a Fireblade replaces only the weapon damage. If the character using the weapon has a damage bonus, that damage bonus is still effective. If the weapon impales or slashes the damage is based on the Fireblade damage, not the weapons regular damage."

 

The last sentence seems to counter the example of the 2H spear, logically the damage should be 18 rather than 11

(The same info appears in the RQ Companion as well)

 

Runemasters (1980):- Page 10, section 6: "Inverting spells - a number of spells can be used to good effect when used in a manner opposite to normal use. If you are faced, for example with a giant using a great sword (who does 2D8 +5D6 damage), then cast Fireblade upon his great sword. Now he only does 3D6 and furthermore he cannot slash with a Fireblade."

 

This counters the whole impale or slash issue and negates the damage bonus specified above.

 

Just to confuse the matter further in issue 14 of Wyrms Footnotes (April1982) Advice from Rurik (edited by Steve Perrin), feedback to letters from players etc "If a flaming weapon impales or slashes the extra damage is based on the fire damage for Fireblade and weapon damage for FireArrow (which is, after all a lower cost spell)."

 

Is there any further official clarification on this issue?

 

Thanks  Byrom

[Charles VA]

4 hours ago, Byrom said:

I posted this in the Facebook RQ page, but there was not a lot of feedback, so any help appreciated:-

RuneQuest 2 (c1980 GW under license from Chaosium) A question for the Rule Lawyers: The spell Fireblade, on the inside cover of the rule book there are a set of clarifications, corrections and Additions which state:

Page 38

" Fireblade - An impaling blow with a Firebladed weapon does the full damage of the weapon (11 points for a 2 H spear, for instance) plus the normal 3D6 damage of the Fireblade. The damage from a Fireblade replaces only the weapon damage. If the character using the weapon has a damage bonus, that damage bonus is still effective. If the weapon impales or slashes the damage is based on the Fireblade damage, not the weapons regular damage."

 

The last sentence seems to counter the example of the 2H spear, logically the damage should be 18 rather than 11

(The same info appears in the RQ Companion as well)

Correct

4 hours ago, Byrom said:

Runemasters (1980):- Page 10, section 6: "Inverting spells - a number of spells can be used to good effect when used in a manner opposite to normal use. If you are faced, for example with a giant using a great sword (who does 2D8 +5D6 damage), then cast Fireblade upon his great sword. Now he only does 3D6 and furthermore he cannot slash with a Fireblade."

This information is incorrect and should be replaced with the Fireblade description from the RQ2 rules.  It is a really bad idea to cast Fireblade on an enemies weapon, under normal circumstances.

4 hours ago, Byrom said:

 

 

Just to confuse the matter further in issue 14 of Wyrms Footnotes (April1982) Advice from Rurik (edited by Steve Perrin), feedback to letters from players etc "If a flaming weapon impales or slashes the extra damage is based on the fire damage for Fireblade and weapon damage for FireArrow (which is, after all a lower cost spell)."

 

Is there any further official clarification on this issue?

 

Thanks  Byrom

Fireblade is a more powerful spell than Firearrow. The Advice from Rurik is correct, of course. It's Steve Perrin after all.

[Byrom]

Thank you for the feedback, much appreciated.

 

[Atgxtg]

Yeah, the example from RuneMasters is in error. Probably because different people were in charge of that project. Or it could be that the errata for Fireblade in RQ2 came out after RuneMasters, and the powers that be decided to change things specifically to prevent such tactics. The errata does seem to directly contradict the advice from RuneMasters in every way.

 

[Mankcam]

Fireblade was a great spell, but pretty bloody powerful for basic magic IMO, even for 4 PP heh heh. I reckon it should have really been a Rune Magic spell, but there's a few things like that in RQ2 and RQ3

Edited February 14, 2016 by Mankcam

[Atgxtg]

The RQ2 version wasn't too bad, because it had to be maintained. If the character took any damage (like from a disrupt) the spell dropped. The RQ3 version didn't have that limitation and was much more difficult to deal with. 

[Charles VA]

In my experience, Fireblade was really only good for the opening rounds of combat and only if the user was able to close quickly and put it into effective use. After the first couple, maybe 3, rounds the user has likely taken a nick of damage, somewhere, and dropped the spell. Because of this, I had many players who forswore Fireblade in favor of Bladesharp in most instances. Firearrow use was another matter entirely.

[Mankcam]

Although I started with RQ2, I must confess most of my play experiences were with RQ3, and I assumed that the spells were practically the same. This is the first time I realised that if you took damage you dropped the Fireblade spell in RQ2, and this does indeed make it less potent than the RQ3 version.

Edited February 14, 2016 by Mankcam

[Guest Vile Traveller]

I thought the "active spell" element in RQ2 was a great balancing feature, somewhat underused. It made Invisibility a perfectly workable battle magic spell.

[Atgxtg]

13 hours ago, Mankcam said:

Although I started with RQ2, I must confess most of my play experiences were with RQ3, and I assumed that the spells were practically the same. This is the first time I realised that if you took damage you dropped the Fireblade spell in RQ2, and this does indeed make it less potent than the RQ3 version.

Don't feel to bad. A friend on mine had RQ1 and got burned badly at a tournament  becuase they changed one of the Rune Spells (I think it was Warding) between editions. The orginal included Detect Enemies, while the RQ2 version did not. The player figured he was covered, and got ambushed. 

[Charles VA]

6 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Don't feel to bad. A friend on mine had RQ1 and got burned badly at a tournament  becuase they changed one of the Rune Spells (I think it was Warding) between editions. The orginal included Detect Enemies, while the RQ2 version did not. The player figured he was covered, and got ambushed. 

You mean the RQ1 version didn't have Detect Enemies and the RQ2 version did. And that would do it. :-)

[g33k]

22 hours ago, charlesvajr said:

In my experience, Fireblade was really only good for the opening rounds of combat and only if the user was able to close quickly and put it into effective use. After the first couple, maybe 3, rounds the user has likely taken a nick of damage, somewhere, and dropped the spell. Because of this, I had many players who forswore Fireblade in favor of Bladesharp in most instances. Firearrow use was another matter entirely.

I had a character with Fireblade... The GM rolled us a random encounter, got an odd look on his face, then asked for ALL the d6'es at the table... he got maybe 20ish of 'em.  Rolled 'em all, summed 'em, rolled 'em all again, summed 'em, then picked a few out and rolled those... I think he said the Giant striding towards us had SIZ 50d6.  He was swinging a fully-grown pine tree as a club.

By an unhappy concatenation of events, my character ended up being the ONLY member of the party engaged in the fight.  Everyone else was caught up in a wierd Dragonnewt-generated social/honor conflict thingie.

I don't recall if the Giant missed, or I got initiative, or what... but I managed to land the first blow, and it was a crit.  Down comes the giant, leg (the only bit I could hit -- the GM reported that the hit-location table was a coin-toss head/tails for R/L legs) completely disabled (into negative HP).

Then the giant started regenerating.  I think it was a chaos feature...?

Ack!!!

Across the next several melee rounds, it turned out that in general my damage and the regeneration just about exactly cancelled each other... sometimes the giant would pull a few points ahead, sometimes I would.  It was turning into a race... first one to manage 3ish successive rounds of "doing notably better" on the damage-vs-regen would get the win:  if the giant got his leg into positive points, my position so close-at-hand would probably let him render me into red mud on the ground; if I could get the giant's leg to negative{Original HP in the Location} then the leg would be permanently out of comission... while the rest of the party was having this tense social/chase scene trying to establish whether there was going to be in instant duel-to-the-death between party members, or if one or more were going to flee, or what...

And THAT is where the GM called rhe game 'til next week (apologies for not actually ADDRESSING the OP's query... but I think it was adequately-answered already, and this is really the only "Fireblade" relevant comment I had... ).

Sadly, my character later joined a Yelmalio temple, and had to give up Fireblade... but I (the player) still REALLY like the spell!

 

Edited February 15, 2016 by g33k

[Charles VA]

7 hours ago, g33k said:

. but I (the player) still REALLY like the spell!

 

I second that, but trollkin with slings really mess with your concentration. 

Edited February 15, 2016 by charlesvajr

[soltakss]

12 hours ago, g33k said:

I had a character with Fireblade... The GM rolled us a random encounter, got an odd look on his face, then asked for ALL the d6'es at the table... he got maybe 20ish of 'em.  Rolled 'em all, summed 'em, rolled 'em all again, summed 'em, then picked a few out and rolled those... I think he said the Giant striding towards us had SIZ 50d6.  He was swinging a fully-grown pine tree as a club.

By an unhappy concatenation of events, my character ended up being the ONLY member of the party engaged in the fight.  Everyone else was caught up in a wierd Dragonnewt-generated social/honor conflict thingie.

I don't recall if the Giant missed, or I got initiative, or what... but I managed to land the first blow, and it was a crit.  Down comes the giant, leg (the only bit I could hit -- the GM reported that the hit-location table was a coin-toss head/tails for R/L legs) completely disabled (into negative HP).

Then the giant started regenerating.  I think it was a chaos feature...?

Ack!!!

Across the next several melee rounds, it turned out that in general my damage and the regeneration just about exactly cancelled each other... sometimes the giant would pull a few points ahead, sometimes I would.  It was turning into a race... first one to manage 3ish successive rounds of "doing notably better" on the damage-vs-regen would get the win:  if the giant got his leg into positive points, my position so close-at-hand would probably let him render me into red mud on the ground; if I could get the giant's leg to negative{Original HP in the Location} then the leg would be permanently out of comission... while the rest of the party was having this tense social/chase scene trying to establish whether there was going to be in instant duel-to-the-death between party members, or if one or more were going to flee, or what...

And THAT is where the GM called rhe game 'til next week (apologies for not actually ADDRESSING the OP's query... but I think it was adequately-answered already, and this is really the only "Fireblade" relevant comment I had... ).

Sadly, my character later joined a Yelmalio temple, and had to give up Fireblade... but I (the player) still REALLY like the spell!

 

That's what spears are for - Stick it in the giant and get an impale, the giant can't regenerate damage while impaled, so keep on pressing it in until the giant falls over. Then cut his head off just in case.

 

[Atgxtg]

Spear? No, that's what bows and arbalests are for. Keep peppering him from a distance. 

[Pentallion]

Giants?  That's what Vingans are for.

[SDLeary]

5 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Spear? No, that's what bows and arbalests are for. Keep peppering him from a distance. 

 

56 minutes ago, Pentallion said:

Giants?  That's what Vingans are for.

In other words just keep peppering the giant with Vingans!

SDLeary

[Guest Vile Traveller]

Vingans? What are they?

 

[Joerg]

45 minutes ago, Vile said:

Vingans? What are they?

 

From the context above: self-guided anti giant missiles. A certain small chance for reusability. Pointy end goes first.

[soltakss]

10 hours ago, Joerg said:

From the context above: self-guided anti giant missiles. A certain small chance for reusability. Pointy end goes first.

Apparently also peppery.

 

[Noita]

Ah i have a name for a Vingan character now

Pepper.

She kills giants.

Edited February 16, 2016 by Iskallor

[Atgxtg]

On 2/16/2016 at 11:10 PM, Vile said:

Vingans? What are they?

 

Proof the the God Learns are alive and well. Oh, and the Lightbringers now claim that Yelm shot first!

 

[Sayerson]

8 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Proof the the God Learns are alive and well. Oh, and the Lightbringers now claim that Yelm shot first!

 

That's right. Elmal saw it all.

[Atgxtg]

7 hours ago, Sayerson said:

That's right. Elmal saw it all.

But nobody checked their Elmal, so it wasn't discovered until now. 

[Sayerson]

4 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

But nobody checked their Elmal, so it wasn't discovered until now. 

Directly to Spam. Sad really.