RQG QuickStart - Parry questions

[Paid a bod yn dwp]

The brittleness of weapons feels right for a Bronze Age game, with the use of softer metals. It also feels in keeping with the grittiness of RQ combat. I could see some interesting/unexpected situations in combat because of it.

Trying to parry a great trolls club attack could result in a dramatic scramble, as parrying shield and sword are both smashed as they try to repel the monstrous blows.

Having thought about it, taking a flat 1hp damage to a successful parrying weapon or shield regardless of rolled damage  could actually help speed up play, being less numbers to keep keep track of 

Edited June 20, 2017 by Paid a bod yn dwp

[Psullie]

24 minutes ago, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

The brittleness of weapons feels right for a Bronze Age game, with the use of softer metals. It also feels in keeping with the grittiness of RQ combat. I could see some interesting/unexpected situations in combat because of it.

Trying to parry a great trolls club attack could result in a dramatic scramble, as parrying shield and sword are both smashed as they try to repel the monstrous blows.

Having thought about it, taking a flat 1hp damage to a successful parrying weapon or shield regardless of rolled damage  could actually help speed up play, being less numbers to keep keep track of 

Yep! My mind went to Rune Lords with Iron Weapons, I imagine these having significantly higher AP's

[styopa]

27 minutes ago, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

The brittleness of weapons feels right for a Bronze Age game, with the use of softer metals. It also feels in keeping with the grittiness of RQ combat. I could see some interesting/unexpected situations in combat because of it.

Trying to parry a great trolls club attack could result in a dramatic scramble, as parrying shield and sword are both smashed as they try to repel the monstrous blows.

Having thought about it, taking a flat 1hp damage to a successful parrying weapon or shield regardless of rolled damage  could actually help speed up play, being less numbers to keep keep track of 

Except Glorantha is bronze age CULTURALLY, not metallurgically.  And even then, only limited parts of it are.  

I mean, if the mechanic works for you, that's fine but I think the RQ3 model felt much better, and people didn't have to tow a cartload of 'backup weapons' to every adventure.

[Psullie]

2 minutes ago, styopa said:

Except Glorantha is bronze age CULTURALLY, not metallurgically.  And even then, only limited parts of it are.  

I mean, if the mechanic works for you, that's fine but I think the RQ3 model felt much better, and people didn't have to tow a cartload of 'backup weapons' to every adventure.

Absolutely, Gloranthan 'bronze' is mined directly and has little relationship to the copper/tin alloy. However Iron is rare, mined only by the dwarves and is known to be more resistant than 'bronze'. Also even by our middle ages, steel weapons broke quite frequently due to poor smelting and impurities in the metals.

[Paid a bod yn dwp]

On 19 June 2017 at 11:08 AM, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

Delving back into the QS, I found on P7 under "Strike Ranks" that "a parry does not take any strike ranks".

1. If parry is outside of the Strike rank mechanism does this indicate that you can indeed parry and attack on the same strike rank if necessary? If so that is a new departure from RuneQuest classic. 

2. I'm still unclear on whether parries can be used against attacks from multiple sources? My guess is that they can, as the text doesn't mention specifically "from one source", as it does clearly in the case of the Dodge description.

3 . Does Dodge also sit outside the strike rank mechanism? Is it possible to dodge and attack on the same strike rank? or do you loose the attack if you dodge on the same SR? (edit: likewise is it possible to dodge and parry on the same strike rank?)

4. What are the limits to using dodge & parry in a Melee round? When attacks come from multiple sources, is it possible to chose parry against one opponent, and then chose dodge against a second opponent in the same round melee round? This also ties into question 2 in this post - Can parries be used against attacks from different sources in a melee round.

5. If a single attacker has more then 1 attack, is it possible for the defender to chose to alternate between parry and dodge for each different attack from the same attacker?

@Jason Durall is it possible to answer these questions, or is it now a matter of waiting till the launch of the core rules?

Also could you confirm whether the QS is correct in stating that a simple success with a parry against a simple attack success results in the parrying weapon/shield takeing 1hp of damage whether or not the damage exceeds the parrying weapons/shield AP?

[Jason D]

6 hours ago, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

@Jason Durall is it possible to answer these questions, or is it now a matter of waiting till the launch of the core rules?

Also could you confirm whether the QS is correct in stating that a simple success with a parry against a simple attack success results in the parrying weapon/shield takeing 1hp of damage whether or not the damage exceeds the parrying weapons/shield AP?

That is indeed what the Quickstart said. 

I have qualified that prior with the statement that the QS represents a compressed version of the rules that both tried to hit the "normal" level of crunchiness for the system, but also was playable in a short session with new players. It also represents the state of the rules in (IIRC) early February when it was written. At that time, we were tweaking some existing rules. The feedback then was very pro- weapon/shield damage. People liked the inevitable wear and tear on weapons and their gear, and the playtests were very enthusiastic about things like shields being cloven, etc. 

Here's the text from the current iteration of the rules dealing with just these issues: 

Summary of Combat Actions

Attack

• A regular success does normal rolled damage plus damage modifier.
• A special success does special damage (impaling, slashing, crushing) plus damage modifier.
• A critical success ignores armor and does special damage plus damage modifier.

Dodge

• A successful Dodge roll avoids any damage.
• A special success with a Dodge roll is required to avoid a special success attack, and a critical success Dodge roll is required to avoid a critical success attack.         

Parry

A successful parry always blocks an attack, whether the attack is a regular, special, or critical success. In each case, the attacker rolls damage. If the damage is below the parrying weapon/shield’s hit points, no damage is done.

• If damage exceeds parrying weapon/shield’s hit points, excess damage always goes to an adjacent hit location on the defender (see page @@) and the parrying weapon/shield loses 1 hit point.
• When parrying an attack that rolled a special success, the excess damage above the parrying weapon/shield goes to an adjacent hit location on the defender (see page @@) and the parrying weapon/shield loses the same amount of hit points. A parry vs. an impaling attack might mean the attacker’s weapon is stuck into the shield (see page @@).
• When parrying a critical success, rolled damage is applied directly to the parrying weapon/shield’s hit points. If it exceeds the hit points, the parrying weapon/shield is destroyed. Any excess damage goes to an adjacent location on the defender, and armor is not subtracted.
• A special parry vs. a normal attack allows the defender to roll the parrying weapon/shield’s damage and compare it to the attacking weapon’s hit points. If the damage done from the parry exceeds the attacking weapon’s hit points, it takes 1 hit point of damage.
• A critical parry versus a normal or special attack will apply the parrying weapon/shield’s damage directly to the attacker’s weapon.
• A critical parry vs. a critical attack avoids all damage altogether.
• Each subsequent parry after the first is reduced by –20%, cumulatively.
• A weapon or shield cannot be used to attack and/or parry in the same strike rank, nor can one be used to attack and/or parry more than once in the same strike rank.

 

 

 

 

[Jeff]

9 hours ago, Psullie said:

Absolutely, Gloranthan 'bronze' is mined directly and has little relationship to the copper/tin alloy. However Iron is rare, mined only by the dwarves and is known to be more resistant than 'bronze'. Also even by our middle ages, steel weapons broke quite frequently due to poor smelting and impurities in the metals.

Gloranthan bronze CAN be mined directly but it is MORE commonly created by mixing copper with tin. 

[Jakob]

@Jason Durall

Thanks! That makes it much clearer - I especially like how damage to weapons is handled in that full version of the rules. There's only one hp value for weapons (no need for an extra armor value for weapons), and it is still possible that a weapon comes out of a parry with no, minimal or significant damage or that it even breaks on all levels of success. Also, in this version, it seems much clearer to me how crits and specials at attack and parry interact.

[Mugen]

This is really an interesting mix of a lot of RuneQuest 3, with bits from RQ2, and Elric!.

Thank you !

[Mankcam]

Cool, yes thanks Jason for explaining, that all seems pretty clear to me 

Edited June 21, 2017 by Mankcam

[Mankcam]

Reminding us that bronze remains the default metal works well with these parry rules. Historically alot of time was spent bashing bronze weapons, armour, and shields back into place after a battle, so armaments regularly losing HP emulates this well.

The advent of iron (and later steel) was a big step forward in real world history. Likewise in Glorantha this will be similar, with the durability factor making arms and armour crafted from ur-metal (equiv to iron) much more valuable than such forged with hu-metal (equiv to bronze), with better AP etc

Edited June 21, 2017 by Mankcam

[Psullie]

2 hours ago, Jeff said:

Gloranthan bronze CAN be mined directly but it is MORE commonly created by mixing copper with tin. 

Hi Jeff

Is this at odds with the Guide, in particular Bones of the Gods p. 16

[Jeff]

Nope. What I didn't put in that essay is that you can create bronze out of an alloy of tin and copper. Which makes mythological sense if you think about it. So bronze comes in either a pure form (pretty common in Dragon Pass, Kethaela, etc.) or as an alloy (more common in much of Peloria, as "pure" bronze is very rare north of Alkoth).

[Psullie]

10 minutes ago, Jeff said:

Nope. What I didn't put in that essay is that you can create bronze out of an alloy of tin and copper. Which makes mythological sense if you think about it. So bronze comes in either a pure form (pretty common in Dragon Pass, Kethaela, etc.) or as an alloy (more common in much of Peloria, as "pure" bronze is very rare north of Alkoth).

That's great thanks

[Paid a bod yn dwp]

7 hours ago, Jason Durall said:

That is indeed what the Quickstart said. 

I have qualified that prior with the statement that the QS represents a compressed version of the rules that both tried to hit the "normal" level of crunchiness for the system, but also was playable in a short session with new players. It also represents the state of the rules in (IIRC) early February when it was written. At that time, we were tweaking some existing rules. The feedback then was very pro- weapon/shield damage. People liked the inevitable wear and tear on weapons and their gear, and the playtests were very enthusiastic about things like shields being cloven, etc. 

Here's the text from the current iteration of the rules dealing with just these issues: 

Summary of Combat Actions

@Jason Durall Thanks thats really super helpful. These tweaks do appear to make sense, and streamline the combat a little more. interesting to see the most recent iteration of  critical attack damage being "special damage" that ignores armour - Its less to remember but still has a significant effect, and i'm guessing still potential for horrific injuries  I think the move to change damage to weapons to only occur when the dam is greater then the AP is sensible. The way damage is deflected, and also given by a parry weapon, feels right too. Having to make a choice between parry or attack on an SR with a single weapon makes for interesting tactical choices. It also makes shields more significant as a tactical choice as you can parry with the shield and attack with the weapon on the same strike rank. Glad to see multiple parries with a cumulative penalty still in the new rules...which leads me to a couple of questions which haven't quite yet been answered....

 

1. Is it possible to use parry at a cumulative -20% penalty against attacks from multiple opponents, or is it limited to defending against attacks from a single opponent?

2. Does dodge still follow the rule of rolling separately for each attack from a single source?

3. Can a character use both dodge and parry in a single melee round, as well as a standard attack providing they don’t occur on the same SR?

 

If you can use both parry and dodge I have these further questions:

i) If you are faced with a single opponent with multiple attacks, can you use parry and dodge in the same melee round, alternating with each of the attacks?

ii) If you are faced with multiple attacking opponents, can you use both parry and dodge in the same melee round, alternating with each different attacker?

 

All that being said its great to see the direction the rules are heading in, thanks so much for the insight 

 

 

Edited June 21, 2017 by Paid a bod yn dwp

[styopa]

7 hours ago, Jason Durall said:

That is indeed what the Quickstart said. 

I have qualified that prior with the statement that the QS represents a compressed version of the rules that both tried to hit the "normal" level of crunchiness for the system, but also was playable in a short session with new players. It also represents the state of the rules in (IIRC) early February when it was written. At that time, we were tweaking some existing rules. The feedback then was very pro- weapon/shield damage. People liked the inevitable wear and tear on weapons and their gear, and the playtests were very enthusiastic about things like shields being cloven, etc. 

Here's the text from the current iteration of the rules dealing with just these issues: 

Summary of Combat Actions

Attack

• A regular success does normal rolled damage plus damage modifier.
• A special success does special damage (impaling, slashing, crushing) plus damage modifier.
• A critical success ignores armor and does special damage plus damage modifier.

Dodge

• A successful Dodge roll avoids any damage.
• A special success with a Dodge roll is required to avoid a special success attack, and a critical success Dodge roll is required to avoid a critical success attack.         

Parry

A successful parry always blocks an attack, whether the attack is a regular, special, or critical success. In each case, the attacker rolls damage. If the damage is below the parrying weapon/shield’s hit points, no damage is done.

• If damage exceeds parrying weapon/shield’s hit points, excess damage always goes to an adjacent hit location on the defender (see page @@) and the parrying weapon/shield loses 1 hit point.
• When parrying an attack that rolled a special success, the excess damage above the parrying weapon/shield goes to an adjacent hit location on the defender (see page @@) and the parrying weapon/shield loses the same amount of hit points. A parry vs. an impaling attack might mean the attacker’s weapon is stuck into the shield (see page @@).
• When parrying a critical success, rolled damage is applied directly to the parrying weapon/shield’s hit points. If it exceeds the hit points, the parrying weapon/shield is destroyed. Any excess damage goes to an adjacent location on the defender, and armor is not subtracted.
• A special parry vs. a normal attack allows the defender to roll the parrying weapon/shield’s damage and compare it to the attacking weapon’s hit points. If the damage done from the parry exceeds the attacking weapon’s hit points, it takes 1 hit point of damage.
• A critical parry versus a normal or special attack will apply the parrying weapon/shield’s damage directly to the attacker’s weapon.
• A critical parry vs. a critical attack avoids all damage altogether.
• Each subsequent parry after the first is reduced by –20%, cumulatively.
• A weapon or shield cannot be used to attack and/or parry in the same strike rank, nor can one be used to attack and/or parry more than once in the same strike rank.

 

Truly, thanks for taking the time to make that clarification.  That really helps.

A few questions for me still:

1) so special damage (ie 2x) is the WEAPON damage rolled 2x, and then add the STR mod?  The STR mod isn't doubled?  That seems to be what you wrote, I just want to make sure I'm reading it right

2) a crit does the special damage AND ignores armor?  That seems to be a change from previously?  Am I understanding that right?

3) a crit ignores worn armor (it's somewhat blocked by a successful parry), does it ignore magical protection (Protection or Shield) as well or no?

3) I know things were simplified for the QS: Currently in the QS, a dodge fumble only gives the attacker a hit if they missed (ie a att special vs a fumble is still just a special).  , Will there be a Dodge Fumble table?  Or some other consequence/value to the attacker ie max weapon damage or something?

4) in line with #3, a dodge fumble currently lets the attacker hit if they missed; does this include if the attacker fumbles?

5) one thing that stands out on the dodge results is that a dodge really only succeeds or fails.  For example, a critical attack vs special dodge still results in a critical attack - the attack is completely unaffected by the very-good-but-ultimately-not-good-enough?  Is that as intended?

6) does a crit/special parry do double rolled parrying weapon damage to attacker's, or just normal rolled (+STR if applicable)?

7) "A critical parry vs. a critical attack avoids all damage altogether." - just to be clear, this seems to be inconsistent with (normal att vs normal parry).  As intended?

8) QS rule: "Successful Parry: If the attack is a failure, the parrying weapon or shield does its full damage against the attacking weapon, breaking it if damage exceeds its weapon’s current hit points" - am I right to infer that this has been changed to "Defender rolls damage vs att weapon AP, if exceeded attacker weapon -1 AP"?

9) From above: "When parrying an attack that rolled a special success, the excess damage above the parrying weapon/shield goes to an adjacent hit location on the defender (see page @@) and the parrying weapon/shield loses the same amount of hit points." - even if the parry is a special?  Or does it then become like a normal hit vs normal parry?

Thanks!

[Jason D]

In answer to your questions: 

1. Yes, the penalty for multiple parries is cumulative vs. all opponents. You don't start the modifier fresh with each new attacker. 

2. Yes, you dodge separately per attack. 

3. You can dodge and parry in the same round, but (I should clarify that) the penalty applies to either/both... so if you Dodge once and parry once, your second action is at -20%, your third at -40%, etc. 

i. You can parry or dodge vs. the same opponent, with the caveats above. 

ii. Yes. 

 

3 hours ago, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

1. Is it possible to use parry at a cumulative -20% penalty against attacks from multiple opponents, or is it limited to defending against attacks from a single opponent?

2. Does dodge still follow the rule of rolling separately for each attack from a single source?

3. Can a character use both dodge and parry in a single melee round, as well as a standard attack providing they don’t occur on the same SR?

 

If you can use both parry and dodge I have these further questions:

i) If you are faced with a single opponent with multiple attacks, can you use parry and dodge in the same melee round, alternating with each of the attacks?

ii) If you are faced with multiple attacking opponents, can you use both parry and dodge in the same melee round, alternating with each different attacker?

 

 

 

 

 

[Paid a bod yn dwp]

1 hour ago, Jason Durall said:

 

In answer to your questions: 

 

@Jason Durall this is shaping up rather well. Really like how parry and dodge has been opened up in play. Makes sense that they both follow those rulings - it stops it getting unnecessarily complicated - half makes me wonder whether extra/cumulative attacks could be handled in the same way? But im sure there would be implications to that which i haven't thought of.

i also infer from your answer that dodge is now opened up to attacks from any source not just one source.

I like this a lot.

Thanks again! 

 

[Mankcam]

The BGB allowed for extra defensive actions at a culminative -30% modifier. I think I prefer RQG's culminative -20% penalty, I think it may work slightly better.

Edited June 21, 2017 by Mankcam

[GianniVacca]

Now we need a new matrix by styopa :-)

[SDLeary]

14 hours ago, Jason Durall said:

• A special parry vs. a normal attack allows the defender to roll the parrying weapon/shield’s damage and compare it to the attacking weapon’s hit points. If the damage done from the parry exceeds the attacking weapon’s hit points, it takes 1 hit point of damage.
• A critical parry versus a normal or special attack will apply the parrying weapon/shield’s damage directly to the attacker’s weapon.

This seems odd for shields, and for parrying weapons other than swords, shod-shafted, or metal weapons (though it might be difficult to define these in-game, I will admit). Might I suggest a simple bonus on the next action for situations like these; i.e.. the Special or Critical parry over a Normal Attack puts the "defender" in a better "attack" position during their next action.

I would suggest this for a "better than attack level success" for dodge as well.

SDLeary

[GamingGlen]

I don't know much about weapon fighting, but...

It seems wrong that shields can break weapons as easily as weapons can, although it does take a critical success; and I really don't see how impaling weapons will break anything, poke holes in things, yes, but not outright break something.

Edited June 21, 2017 by GamingGlen

[styopa]

3 hours ago, GianniVacca said:

Now we need a new matrix by styopa :-)

Exactly the point of my questions...started to do it, then ran into some question spaces.  Ie it seems normal att vs normal parry should intuitively be the same as special vs special (implied, but not stated) and crit vs crit (which is explicitly stated to be totally different).  So yes, with a few clarifications I'll re-issue the matrix (made with a little clearer consistent nomenclature) here as cutnpaste, excel file, and pdf.

It maybe just me, but I find matrices like that much easier to comprehend.  But very happy to provide stuff I'm making for myself anyway.

[styopa]

1 hour ago, GamingGlen said:

I don't know much about weapon fighting, but...

It seems wrong that shields can break weapons as easily as weapons can, although it does take a critical success; and I really don't see how impaling weapons will break anything, poke holes in things, yes, but not outright break something.

1) note that most decent sized weapons (ie d8+STR damage, etc) are doing a fair bit more damage than a shield (which do a d6, and could very justifiably be reduced to a d4...) so in an exchange of parry damage, it's pretty much more likely that a weapon will cause a -1 AP to defending parry weapon than a shield would in return. (Although I'd say you have an argument when we observe that the AP of a med shield is the same as a broadsword...not sure I'd agree with that intuitively)

2) I'd entirely agree that impaling weapons can be...well, impaled on things (for which I'm certain there are rules in the full version) but you're right that intuitively they shouldn't do more than -1AP ever to a parrying thing...*eventually* they might break something, but not for a long while.  I've seen many houserules over the years that get down into the weeds of 'wood and woodhafted weapons take full AP damage from metal, but metal ones take none from wood, or limited from wood-hafted, etc...' but honestly, that adds a TON of crunchy bits for not a lot of gameplay value - even for my deeply simulationist heart.

[Jason D]

8 hours ago, GamingGlen said:

I don't know much about weapon fighting, but...

It seems wrong that shields can break weapons as easily as weapons can, although it does take a critical success; and I really don't see how impaling weapons will break anything, poke holes in things, yes, but not outright break something.

Ultimately, combat in any RPG is an abstraction, and we're aiming for a sort of mid-crunch that gives a bit of flavor, but doesn't attempt to mimic each footstep, feint, and angle of every blow.

Breaking down individual weapons into ratings of "more/less likely to damage attacker's weapon when parrying" is, I feel, an unmanageable amount of detail. 

I've personally broken a wood-axe while chopping wood... but not many would claim that a piece of stationary firewood is a danger to an axe. 

In combat, a well-utilized shield incorporates the edge as well as the point. Parrying a blow could mean hitting that edge hard against the blade of a sword, bending it and making it more brittle when it's bent back. Or it ruins the edge. Ancient world and iron age combat is full of examples of weapons bending. A reputed Viking tactic was to use a shield to trap a sword used against it by letting it sink into the edge by a few inches, and then maneuvering the shield forcefully to either disarm the attacker or even bend/break their weapon. 

A weapon is more than the striking head, as well. A shield might guide the weapon to striking the wall/ground/etc. to damage it. A well-parried blow might cause a sword-blade to become loose in the hilt, or knock part of the crosspiece off. It might cause damage to a hafted weapon by making the socket loose.

Similarly, a hafted weapon doesn't need to be parrying directly with the haft directly, like a quarterstaff. That's a great way to damage the haft. You parry with a hafted weapon by guiding a blow away from yourself, such as into the ground or air. A parry can also be a defensive attack, using a spear-head as a chopping weapon to hack at the haft of another weapon (but this is less common) while it's in the midst of an attempted strike. 

Statistically, also, shields are much less likely to damage weapons than weapons will damage shields. Damage for small/medium/large shields is relatively low (1d3/1d4/1d6) which puts a small or medium shield's damage range at lower than a dagger, and a large shield at roughly the same as a light club.