Jump to content

RQG QuickStart - Parry questions


Paid a bod yn dwp

Recommended Posts

Whoops... got my replies out of order. 

1) Different damage types do different specials. For the quickstart we streamlined it to one type. For impales and slashes, damage modifier is not doubled. For a crush, damage is rolled normally and the maximum damage modifier is applied plus rolled damage modifier. 

2. Yes, a crit does whatever the special damage type is AND ignores the armor. 

3. A critical hit ignores worn armor and any other protection. It's the most powerful result. 

3 (you have two 3s... sneaky!) and 4. Yes, a fumbled Dodge means that the attacker automatically hits (a normal success) unless the attacker also rolls a fumble, at which point everyone should just call it quits and go home before they embarrass themselves further. ;) No Dodge fumble table. It's bad enough that the defender has stepped clumsily into the path of an attack that would have missed. 

5. Yes, we're trying to keep things simple, and RQG does not use the "shifting success" of BGB BRP. 

6. Normal damage, not special/crit damage. 

7. Yes, we wanted to make critical vs. critical be a dramatic exception. Rolling a critical parry vs. a critical attack shouldn't yield in a disappointment when your weapon shatters. 

8. As noted prior, the quickstart uses an earlier iteration of the rules at the time the quickstart was developed. The above excerpt is the current state of the rules. 

9. Even when. 

 

 

15 hours ago, styopa said:

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!

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

@Jason Durall 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.

We'd rather limit combat actions using the splitting attacks rule we've got in place. Combat is already deadly and crunchy enough without giving high % characters the chance to do multiple attacks per round even when they've got little chance of success, "just because". Use of Mobility would make that even more of an abuse. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, SDLeary said:

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

To keep things simple, we've avoided a lot of carryover effects from one round to another. Long, bitter experience at the gaming table has indicated that players inevitably end up with one of two situations: 

  • Player: "I forgot I had a bonus from last round! Crap!" 
  • GM: "Are you still adding that bonus? That expired last round." Player: "Crap. Sorry!" 
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jason Durall said:

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.

Yes, I like the balance you are striking. Although with some differences in QS rules to the latest iteration, this is how the level of crunchiness came across in our FreeRPG game - Comparable to a nicely brewed cup of tea, but with potential for limb loss :) 

3 hours ago, Jason Durall said:

You parry with a hafted weapon by guiding a blow away from yourself, such as into the ground or air.

Yes this whole explanation makes sense to me. I'm glad the rules aren't being pushed into too much complication. For me the crunchiness as presented is striking the right balance

Edited by Paid a bod yn dwp
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jason Durall said:

We'd rather limit combat actions using the splitting attacks rule we've got in place. Combat is already deadly and crunchy enough without giving high %

Yes I see the logic now- Thanks for explaining.

Its really interesting to read the reasons for design choices. So much work is obviously going on behind the scenes with the play testing, its impressive.  The most difficult aspect for me now will be waiting for the release of the core rules.

Looking through the QS i'm amazed that you packed so much into relatively few pages, its a great primer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's what we're going to do going forward:

Cult of Chaos Forum (password protected) - Discussion, questions, post mortems about "The Broken Tower" scenario in the RuneQuest Quickstart

RuneQuest Forum - Discussion about the RQG rules themselves, and the rules as presented in the RuneQuest Quickstart. No discussion or spoilers about "The Broken Tower" please.

Carry on...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Jason Durall said:

3 (you have two 3s... sneaky!)

Not sneaky, just Pocharngo's hand in my daily life.  

Thanks very much for the replies.  Will consolidate them into a table later today.  Unlike you, I can't claim my posts as "gainful working"

6 hours ago, Jason Durall said:

To keep things simple, we've avoided a lot of carryover effects from one round to another. Long, bitter experience at the gaming table has indicated that players inevitably end up with one of two situations: 

  • Player: "I forgot I had a bonus from last round! Crap!" 
  • GM: "Are you still adding that bonus? That expired last round." Player: "Crap. Sorry!" 

THANK YOU.  Smart move times a million.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Jason Durall said:

To keep things simple, we've avoided a lot of carryover effects from one round to another. Long, bitter experience at the gaming table has indicated that players inevitably end up with one of two situations: 

  • Player: "I forgot I had a bonus from last round! Crap!" 
  • GM: "Are you still adding that bonus? That expired last round." Player: "Crap. Sorry!" 

Very good decision, as far as I'm concerned!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Jason Durall said:

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. 

Reflecting on my thoughts, I was thinking more on the attack side of things, forgetting that parries may deflect the attacking object to more disadvantageous situations or surfaces.

You already broken down 3 types of weapons for criticals, and impaling weapons can get stuck into things. We liked that way back when we played RQ2.  Perhaps certain types, impaling in this case, might just have a slightly different take on damaging things defensively?  

Most games categorize shields into very few types (sometimes just 1. *cough* D&D5 *cough*),  RQ always had several types by size and shape.  Perhaps add in some price variations, like weak (1/2 the HP) for 1/5 the price (beginner's shield; and I'm just tossing out numbers), sturdy shields (the ones already in game), and weapon-breaking shields, and even weapon-breaking weapons.  I know a couple players who would go for that latter two, and have their PCs pay extra for them.

Will you have some references to various objects that might be picked up and used as a parrying device? (thinking tavern brawl after weapons get drawn)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, GamingGlen said:

Most games categorize shields into very few types (sometimes just 1. *cough* D&D5 *cough*),  RQ always had several types by size and shape.  Perhaps add in some price variations, like weak (1/2 the HP) for 1/5 the price (beginner's shield; and I'm just tossing out numbers), sturdy shields (the ones already in game), and weapon-breaking shields, and even weapon-breaking weapons.  I know a couple players who would go for that latter two, and have their PCs pay extra for them.

Will you have some references to various objects that might be picked up and used as a parrying device? (thinking tavern brawl after weapons get drawn)

IMO that sort of stuff - variations as a result of quality, etc - to me is all the sort of stuff that might be in a campaign book, or local houseruled.

Good idea on having some example 'stuff' other than shields.  Please, please, please: if you do that, you have to include a trollkin.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK here's the tables as I've parsed them.  Apologies if I've missed anything.

The "?" means I think that's the inferred result, but it's my supposition unless/until Jason/Jeff confirm.

Attack vs DODGE

Dodge Critical

Dodge Special

Dodge Success

Dodge Fail

Dodge Fumb

Att Critical

Att Miss

Att Crit

Att Crit

Att Crit

Att Crit

Att Special

Att Miss

Att Miss

Att Spec

Att Spec

Att Spec

Att Success

Att Miss

Att Miss

Att Miss

Att Hit

Att Hit

Att Fail

Att Miss

Att Miss

Att Miss

Nothing Happens

Att Hit

Att Fumble

Att Miss & Fumb

Att Miss & Fumb

Att Miss & Fumb

Att Miss & Fumb

Att Fumb

Dodge: may dodge all attacks from one source, roll dodge vs each attack.

 

Attack vs PARRY

Parry Critical

Parry Special

Parry Success

Parry Fail

Parry Fumble

Att Critical

Nothing happens

Att Crit, Parry3

Att Crit, Parry3

Att Crit

Att Crit

Att Special

Att Spec, Counter3

Att Spec, Parry2

Att Spec, Parry2

Att Spec

Att Spec

Att Success

Att Hit, Counter3

Att Hit, Counter1

Att Hit, Parry1

Att Hit

Att Hit

Att Fail

Counter3?

Counter1?

Counter1?

Nothing Happens

Att Hit

Att Fumble

Att Fumb, Counter3?

Att Fumb,Counter1?

Att Fumb,Counter1?

Att Fumb

Att Fumb

Att Miss: attacker does no damage to defender.

Att Hit:  attacker does normal rolled damage plus damage modifier.

Att Spec:  attacker does special damage:

                        Impale: 2x weapon dmg+STR mod, chance to impale (%?)

                        Slash: 2x weapon dmg+STR mod+?

                        Crush: normal weapon damage + STR mod + (max)STR Mod

Att Crit:  attacker does special effect, damage ignores armor (but not AP of a successful parry)

Att Fumb and/or Def Fumb: Attacker and/or defender fumble, respectively.  (At this point, only consequence of Dodge Fumble is a hit if the attacker would have otherwise missed)

Parry1: att rolled damage vs parrying item, if it exceeds parry item AP, parrying item -1 AP.  Excess damage applied to defender.

Parry2:  att rolled damage vs parrying item, damage exceeding current AP goes to defender AND is subtracted from parrying item AP.

Parry3:  Att rolled damage is subtracted from parrying item AP, excess goes to defender ignoring armor.

Counter1: def rolled damage vs attacking item, if it exceeds attacking item AP, attacking item -1 AP. 

Counter2:  def rolled damage vs attacking item, damage exceeding current AP subtracted from parrying item AP. 

Counter3: Defending parry item does full damage to attackers weapon AP directly.

 

A couple of comments/questions:  

Each of the 'parry' effects (what happens to the defender's parrying item) has a 'counter' version (what happens to the attacker's weapon instead, on a good enough success), EXCEPT "Counter2" is listed in the effects, but shows up nowhere on the table.  I only put it there for completeness sake, so Jason can confirm that no, it belongs nowhere as an intermediate step between counter1 (exceeding AP results in 1AP loss) and counter3 (damage done directly to AP)..

Do subsequent dodges vs multiple attacks from the single attacker suffer -20% after the first?  (I don't think it does, just confirming)

Are there Parry fumbles, or is their effect the same as Dodge Fumbles? (That's what I have in the table above)  Drop Parrying weapon or something?

From what I can see then in short:

DODGE - good vs one attacker, many dodges without penalty.  All or nothing.  

PARRY: allows multiple parries against multiple attacks regardless of source, but suffers -20% per subsequent after first.  Finite protection that degrades. Partial mitigation with merely ANY success.  

Here's the Quick Ref Sheet I put together for the QS, now with our better understanding of the att vs parry, att vs dodge.

I don't think the other stuff has changed at all?

RQG QR Sheet.pdf

RQG QR Sheet.docx

Edited by styopa
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Jason Durall said:

To keep things simple, we've avoided a lot of carryover effects from one round to another. Long, bitter experience at the gaming table has indicated that players inevitably end up with one of two situations: 

  • Player: "I forgot I had a bonus from last round! Crap!" 
  • GM: "Are you still adding that bonus? That expired last round." Player: "Crap. Sorry!" 

Fair enough. I've been one of those that in the past has forgotten such bonuses. 

The thing with Shields just feels wrong though. Perhaps on a Critical parry with a shield only. 

Seems like my first house rule, and I don't have the QS rules yet! ;-)

SDLeary

Edited by SDLeary
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/20/2017 at 6:01 PM, Mugen said:

How many Hit Points do weapons have, in general ?

At a rate of 1 HP (or more) per parry, it seems they will break often.

Is it possible to get HP back through crafts ?

Weapon hit points vary but 9 seems average.  Most people use shields as a result.  And yes, there is a common magic spell called repair that will instantly fix a broken weapon, and crafts will do a better and more permanent job of the same.

If you want a laugh, 1st Edition Stormbringer had a classic Murphy's Rule, that improvised weapons had unlimited hit points for purposes of parrying.  This led to characters taking proficiency in rapier and for off hand parrying, entries such as "feather", "scroll case" or "paper bag", as a bit of a joke back in the day. An obvious rules abuse but a funny one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 23 June 2017 at 4:19 AM, styopa said:

Do subsequent dodges vs multiple attacks from the single attacker suffer -20% after the first?  (I don't think it does, just confirming)

Are there Parry fumbles, or is their effect the same as Dodge Fumbles? (That's what I have in the table above)  Drop Parrying weapon or something?

From what I can see then in short:

DODGE - good vs one attacker, many dodges without penalty.  All or nothing.  

PARRY: allows multiple parries against multiple attacks regardless of source, but suffers -20% per subsequent after first.  Finite protection that degrades. Partial mitigation with merely ANY success.  

Regrading Dodge - @Jason Durallhas confirmed that it is under the same ruling as parry, in that any subsequent dodges/and/or parries in a single melee round suffer -20% cumulative penalties, whether against attacks from a single opponent, or attacks from multiple sources. As a result dodge is now effective against attacks from multiple sources not just a single source as in the Quick start rules

 

Edited by Paid a bod yn dwp
Added last sentence, and changed linked post
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

Regrading Dodge - @Jason Durallhas confirmed that it is under the same ruling as parry, in that any subsequent dodges/and/or parries in a single melee round suffer -20% cumulative penalties, whether against attacks from a single opponent, or attacks from multiple sources. As a result dodge is now effective against attacks from multiple sources not just a single source as in the Quick start rules

 

OK, so that makes the tactical comparison simpler:

Dodge: all or nothing - beat or tie your opponent's success to avoid all the damage. 

Parry: limited, ablative defense but you merely need a success to have it work to at least some degree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/23/2017 at 11:42 AM, Darius West said:

If you want a laugh, 1st Edition Stormbringer had a classic Murphy's Rule, that improvised weapons had unlimited hit points for purposes of parrying.  This led to characters taking proficiency in rapier and for off hand parrying, entries such as "feather", "scroll case" or "paper bag", as a bit of a joke back in the day. An obvious rules abuse but a funny one.

Ah, the pen-and-paper version of the leafy branch from MMO fame (forgot which one), where due to an absurdly high attack speed a low-damage novelty item for druids (the leafy branch) became one of the most deadly weapons in the game before being patched. 

I should start a thread in the Stormbringer forum about best exploits for that game. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So thinking about the refinements to RGQ over the Quack-start rules, this is what jumps out at me:

  • Toughness of parry weapon/attack weapon is now a factor (unless a critical is rolled) - I like this, it makes sense to have only damage effective above the AP of the weapon/shield . But there is also still the devastating critical which bypasses the AP altogether and is applied directly to the Weapon/shield AP points.
  • Dodge is brought in line with parry. More flexible, effective against multiple opponents ( not just single opponent), and like parry suffers -20% cumulative penalty on every dodge after the first. - Nice that dodge and parry are more flexible defensive options now, and interchangeable.
  • Critical Damage has been simplified to being a special that ignores armour - Streamlined simple change *why didn't i think of that?*. less for newbies to have to remember, but still significant damage.
  • You can only perform one action with a single weapon on a single Strike Rank - So no parry and attack on on the same SR with a single weapon. Makes a second weapon/shield tactically significant as you can still parry on the same strike rank with the second weapon/shield.

@Jason Durall With strike ranks is it possible to delay a melee attack for tactical advantage? For instance delaying an attack to occur on an opponents SR so that they have to make a choice between using their parry or attack?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the things I am curious about is how the rune priest DI will be handled in the new RQG.

Say no to censorship

  • "Did he say he was a Rune Lord or that he knew one?"
  • "Go, and never darken my towels again."
  • "Ach Crimmens! Ye smited me...ye craven. Worra, worra. What would me Mum say?"
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...