New RQ design questions

[trystero]

I prefer the RQ3 skill category modifiers because they make every characteristic point count, whereas in RQ2 a STR of 17 and a STR of 20 give the same adjustment to Manipulation skills. Also, I liked having POW involved in fewer categories.

That said, I'd suggest either not including POW in any category modifiers or just computing skills based on original POW and not letting later changes affect skills. Even with the less-granular RQ2 modifiers, many characters are still going to be bumping their skills up or down on a regular basis as they gain and lose POW.

[Mankcam]

6 hours ago, K Peterson said:

I don't think that's the definition of "whiff" he's using in this context. Maybe it's obscure US-slang, but he's using it more to mean hit-and-miss. For example, failing to hit a baseball with a bat, or a golf ball with a club, is referred to as "whiffing", or to "whiff". I don't think it has anything to do with malodorous game mechanics. 

You may be right - US slang can be quite different to Australian slang at times - I never considered that it could mean 'hit and miss', I have heard of 'striking out' (US baseball slang) to mean such, but never 'whiffing'. Thanks for pointing that out 

[Mankcam]

11 hours ago, Mugen said:

Fact is, you don't have to assign a different skill base for each skill. You can have one per category. For instance:

Agility (STR+DEX)

Communication (CHA+INT)

Knowledge (INTx2)

Perception (CON+INT)

Stealth (DEX+INT)

I would not put POW in any of those, given this characteristic is subject to many changes...

I quite like this idea for Skill Category Modifiers. It's a pity that it was rejected.

 l also think the RQ2 calculation for Skill Mods are just as easy, but the actual modifier needs to be much more significant (ie: +10%, +20%, +30%, etc)

Edited June 21, 2016 by Mankcam

[g33k]

1 hour ago, Mankcam said:

You may be right - US slang can be quite different to Australian slang at times - I never considered that it could mean 'hit and miss', I have heard of 'striking out' (US baseball slang) to mean such, but never 'whiffing'. Thanks for pointing that out 

It is, notionally, the sound a sword (or a bat) makes on "a swing and a miss!"

I've seen "whiff factor" used online quite a bit to describe a problem wherein combat drags on and on because the defenses overmatch the offensive abilities...

[Atgxtg]

2 hours ago, Mankcam said:

You may be right - US slang can be quite different to Australian slang at times - I never considered that it could mean 'hit and miss', I have heard of 'striking out' (US baseball slang) to mean such, but never 'whiffing'. Thanks for pointing that out 

Yup, it's US baseball slang.   A common chant for kids during a baseball game when an opposing batter steps up to the plate is: "He's a whiffer, he can't hit!"

 

It probably derived from the Wiffle Ball, a common plastic ball ( that was often sold with a plastic bat) toy that is popular way to play baseball in the US. In fact, looking at Wikipedia:

the ball most commonly used in the game was invented by David N. Mullany at his home in Fairfield, Connecticut in 1953 when he designed a ball that curved easily for his 12-year-old son. It was named when his son and his friends would refer to a strikeout as a "whiff". The classic trademarked Wiffle Ball is about the same size as a regulation baseball, but is hollow, lightweight, of resilient plastic, no more than 1/8 inch (3 mm) thick. One half is perforated with eight .75-inch (19 mm) oblong holes; the other half is non-perforated. This construction allows pitchers to throw a tremendous variety of curveballs and risers. Wiffle balls are typically packaged with a hollow, hard plastic, yellow bat that measures 32 inches (810 mm) in length and about 1.25 inches (32 mm) in diameter.

  

Edited June 21, 2016 by Atgxtg

[MOB]

1 hour ago, g33k said:

It is, notionally, the sound a sword (or a bat) makes on "a swing and a miss!"

I've seen "whiff factor" used online quite a bit to describe a problem wherein combat drags on and on because the defenses overmatch the offensive abilities...

I'm glad this has been explained, because here is Australia at least, if something is "whiffy" or has a "whiff factor" it means it stinks, either literally ("the bag my son keeps his soccer boots in is whiffy") or figuratively ("that politician's explanation of why he left that meeting with the property developer stuffing a brown paper bag full of cash into his pocket is a bit whiffy"). Not sure I would have picked up its other meaning.

[Mankcam]

Well I'm not sure which meaning Jeff was referring to, but this has certainly been educational for me - like MOB says, down here a 'Whiff Factor' is like saying something has a 'Bullsh*t Factor', its derogatory and almost fighting words heh heh

[rust]

4 minutes ago, Mankcam said:

Well I'm not sure which meaning Jeff was referring to, but this has certainly been educational for me - like MOB says, down here a 'Whiff Factor' is like saying something has a 'Bullsh*t Factor', its derogatory and almost fighting words heh heh

In my professional field, nursing, the "whiff test" is a test for bacterial vaginosis ... 

[rsanford]

This was educational! Apparently the whiff factor has multiple meanings. Who would have thunk :-)

[g33k]

I also know the "bad smell" sense of "whiff," but it's usually (that I've seen) explicitly called-out as such -- "he caught a whiff of something foul" or the like; and the associated notion of fouled ethics/morals (e.g. bribing a cop, as cited above).

Online, in RPG discussions, I usually find "whiff" in this other sense, discussed above.

I suppose now Jeff will come along and tell us he meant someting entirely different... 

 

[Mankcam]

It probably has a different meaning in Glorantha, heh heh

[SDLeary]

9 hours ago, Mugen said:

As for myself, I tend to use SIZ diffently, and give bonus or malus to skills if SIZ are really different.

For instance, if a character with SIZ 13 tries to hide from one with SIZ 10, I will not give any bonus or malus. But a SIZ 16 one will have a malus.

Just out of curiosity, what is the rational here? I would think that large size would be a detriment. No matter the size of the seeker, if the person hiding is larger than average they should visually stand out more, or be more likely to make a noise unintentionally.

SDLeary

Edited June 22, 2016 by SDLeary

[Mugen]

1 hour ago, SDLeary said:

Just out of curiosity, what is the rational here? I would think that large size would be a detriment. No matter the size of the seeker, if the person hiding is larger than average they should visually stand out more, or be more likely to make a noise unintentionally.

SDLeary

Sorry if I was not clear. Of course, the one with the higher SIZ will either have a malus to his Stealth checks or give a bonus to the other's Perception skill.

[Pentallion]

2 hours ago, Mankcam said:

It probably has a different meaning in Glorantha, heh heh

Your whiffs may vary.

[styopa]

On 6/21/2016 at 0:47 PM, Blacktoad said:

Very good points. I think sometimes I get too fixated on crunch, especially when setting up overland maps on Roll20 so that measurements are accurate and usable. I will assume measurements will be the same as RQ2.

Once that occurred to me (the time-instead-of-distance thing) I began to realize how much differently medieval people would have conceptualized their sense of place, and how radically the "aerial view" has altered our perceptions as moderns, particularly in the way we see the top-down view of things as authoritative - from blueprints to maps.

In fact, for the medieval person, they'd usually never have even conceived of this (except for fantasists, trying to imagine what birds could see).  The 'top down' map was pretty limited to places where you could actually get such a view close to a city, like the alps.  Otherwise, their 'city diagrams' were simply profiles, and then a sort of mental-topology of places and relationships.

(Sorry, you can probably tell one of my degrees was in geography.  Maybe this isn't interesting for most.)

It really made me start presenting information in games without maps, as much as possible (tactical maps, sure, but I mean the big world maps we all love to draw and look at).

[groovyclam]

4 hours ago, styopa said:

It really made me start presenting information in games without maps, as much as possible (tactical maps, sure, but I mean the big world maps we all love to draw and look at).

But that might not necessarily hold true for fantasy settings where plenty of flying creatures or spells could give aerial views of the land.

[nerfherder]

17 hours ago, styopa said:

(Sorry, you can probably tell one of my degrees was in geography.  Maybe this isn't interesting for most.)

It really made me start presenting information in games without maps, as much as possible (tactical maps, sure, but I mean the big world maps we all love to draw and look at).

I've actually been trying to think of a way to communicate graphically the basics of a world layout (including showing the main areas) without just showing the players a copy of the highly detailed and accurate map.  Any suggestions?

[pachristian]

2 hours ago, nerfherder said:

I've actually been trying to think of a way to communicate graphically the basics of a world layout (including showing the main areas) without just showing the players a copy of the highly detailed and accurate map.  Any suggestions?

I think you would be making a simple task unneccsarily complicated. Players are modern people, and are used to see things as maps. We use maps because that is simplest way to communicate the layout of the world.

That being said, I have to agree your idea would help put players in the mindset. 

[styopa]

16 hours ago, groovyclam said:

But that might not necessarily hold true for fantasy settings where plenty of flying creatures or spells could give aerial views of the land.

Absolutely true, keeping in mind that 1) it's a vanishingly tiny % of people that get to fly and 2) they'd have to have a way to communicate that visually for it to really change people's outlook persistently and durably.  Obviously, for example, medievals understood the concept of top-down plans, maps, etc.  I'm just saying that it wasn't necessarily their 'go to' way to see the world, the way it seems to be for us.

 

3 hours ago, nerfherder said:

I've actually been trying to think of a way to communicate graphically the basics of a world layout (including showing the main areas) without just showing the players a copy of the highly detailed and accurate map.  Any suggestions?

I try to use contemporary things like 

It's a map, but not *precisely* a map, if you get my drift.

 

[Jeff]

All - although this is interesting it really has nothing to do with RQ Design Questions. Could you create a new thread for this?

[Soccercalle]

I wonder when I will be able to buy the new Glorantha. I am planning to start a new campaign with new players and wonder if it will be good to wait. 

Edited June 30, 2016 by Soccercalle
typo

[Code Ronin]

10 hours ago, Soccercalle said:

I wonder when I will be able to buy the new Glorantha. I am planning to start a new campaign with new players and wonder if it will be good to wait. 

RuneQuest newbie here, but so far I like what I see. I've heard it'll be released at Gen Con, which is shortly after my birthday. Good present, there.

[Falconer]

Do I understand rightly? Will RQ4 have the same assumed time period as the 13th Age materials? Will the Glorantha Sourcebook be equally directly applicable to both games? Is the GS more similar to the 1990 Genertela set, or the 2004 Dragon Pass gazetteer, or somewhere in-between, or other?

[jajagappa]

2 hours ago, Falconer said:

Will RQ4 have the same assumed time period as the 13th Age materials?

Expecting that to be yes.

2 hours ago, Falconer said:

Will the Glorantha Sourcebook be equally directly applicable to both games?

Yes, we expect it should be fully applicable to RQ, 13G, and HQG.

 

[Steve]

On 10/07/2016 at 10:55 PM, Falconer said:

Is the GS more similar to the 1990 Genertela set, or the 2004 Dragon Pass gazetteer, or somewhere in-between, or other?

Jeff has told us previously that it is very myth-centric. So that doesn't sound like either of those to me.