Chaosium's Runequest 2 Vs Runequest 3 (Avalon Hill)

[Jeff]

2 hours ago, BWP said:

Well, I guess I'd identify as an "old guard" type, and none of the groups I've ever played with instituted any such house rule.

I haven't thought enough about the rule to worry about it to be honest.  If the RQG rule is what it is, I'll probably go along with it.

However, a house rule that I've contemplated in the past (but right now I can't remember if I ever actually implemented it) was to allow someone doing weapon training to do A & P training simultaneously, with whatever combination of weapon/shield/whatever that made sense for the character.  So if you're training in 2H Axe, then you train with A & P at the same time (the actual percentages though would vary because of the differences between Manipulation and Agility bonuses).  If you're training 1H Sword and normally use a shield, then you can train Sword A and Shield P at the same time.  In all cases whatever skill % is highest would determine training time.  (Alternately you could train weapon attack + Dodge simultaneously.)

A little thought might yield some other "train two skills at the same time" combinations.  Lance attack + Ride, for instance.  If a player can convince me of a plausible (to me) combination, then I'd go with it ....

 

We initially tried this and boy there was strong pushback from the players who wanted an intuitive and exciting combat system more than they worried about whether something perfectly modelled "realistic" combat. And make no mistake, the former greatly outnumbers the latter. So as in all things, a balance was struck.

[Mankcam]

3 hours ago, BWP said:

However, a house rule that I've contemplated in the past (but right now I can't remember if I ever actually implemented it) was to allow someone doing weapon training to do A & P training simultaneously, with whatever combination of weapon/shield/whatever that made sense for the character.

Yeah that's what we initially did after a year or so of playing RAW. I met a few other people who also did this. As a GM I thought it was a good idea.

Although after a few years of play, I think it was just simplier to combine the skills. Players liked it, and the GMs I knew didnt worry either way, so after a while it became common common practice for us. 

I have read elsewhere that others did likewise, it seems like a common houserule to me.

Having separate attack/parry skills that train up at the same rate  works for me, although many players often prefer just having a combat skill that covers both.

We also combined a few other skills, it wasnt just combat. Move Quietly, Conceal Object, and Hide got rolled into a Stealth skill; Climb and Jump got morphed into an Athletics skill (I think I may have initially called it Physique). It just felt like separating these was a bit tedious at times. This had nothing to do with MRQ, we were doing it before MRQ and the BGB.

These days I dont mind either way.

 

Edited May 28, 2018 by Mankcam

[simonh]

6 hours ago, BWP said:

However, a house rule that I've contemplated in the past (but right now I can't remember if I ever actually implemented it) was to allow someone doing weapon training to do A & P training simultaneously, with whatever combination of weapon/shield/whatever that made sense for the character. 

 

Exactly. If you watch anyone actually doing any combat training, it’s immediately obvious that executing an attack is only possible if you are also able to deflect or neutralise your opponent’s offensive capability. There are only two ways separating those concerns makes sense. Either you have no interest in attack, in which case your defensive manoeuvres can disregard offence and nit bother thinking about settling up offensive moves, but training this way means any offensive training you do separately will be useless with this defensive skill you’re training. Or alternately you have no interest in defence, in which case you can train in suicidal offensive manoeuvres with no regard to protecting yourself, but this training will be completely unusable in combination with any defensive training you do.

 

In practice combat training is about chaining offensive and defensive manoeuvres together in effective combination. The only feasible way to train in defence and attack in a combinable way is to do them together. At which point, your really training in one thing.

Edited May 28, 2018 by simonh

[Madrona]

21 hours ago, simonh said:

...In practice combat training is about chaining offensive and defensive manoeuvres together in effective combination. The only feasible way to train in defence and attack in a combinable way is to do them together. At which point, your really training in one thing.

This, exactly this. I'm not going to pretend I'm a great swordsman or anything or a master of ancient weaponry. But I took some martial arts as a kid, and did some SCA stuff. Moreover I spent most of my childhood beating my friends with large stick weapons. Even the tiny lessons learnt of a 12 year old with a long stick, a wicker 'pelta' and a few javelins made out of sword fern stalks taught me this.

The only time defense on an individual level doesn't matter as part of offense, it has to do with ranged combat or formation combat. But a hoplite still needs to train in how to fight out of a formation, and the line-infanty of the 19th century still emphasized how to properly 'duel' with a bayonet. Those dueling manuals, look them up sometime, Russian, British, french, American, what have you! They're all the same. Parry, parry, parry, attack when you have the defensive upper hand! Here's how to parry against a tall man, here's how to parry against a short man, here's how to parry against a mounted man! Once you parry or have gained a defensive upper hand, thrust, lunge, gunbutt!

Edited May 29, 2018 by Madrona