Jump to content
MOB

RQG Corrections Thread

Recommended Posts

page 431:

The line for 1561 on Family History section of the character sheet is all wrong. It reads "Favored grandparent is active. Parents born this year." It should most probably read, "Your grandparents were born by this year."  "Your parents were born by this year" should probably be on a line of its own under 1582. There should be space for that when you get rid of the errant 1617 line

Edited by Scott A
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Minor typo on page 216:

"This is either padded leather (described in the notes to the chart), or tougher leather the (2-point) the thickness of shoe leather. "

------------------

Some confusing content on page 57:

"The lowest value a skill can have is 00%, which represents
zero chance of success
. A skill never has a minus value; if a
bonus would make a skill start below 00%, write in 00%." (p 57)

Page 57 seems wrong and mingle two separate facts. The lowest possible skill rating of 0% and that abilities with a rating of '00' have zero chance of a success.

See also Quickstart page 2: " Abilities with a rating of '00' have zero chance of a success"

So a skill value of 00% is the lowest skill rating but has a chance of 5% (01-05 on d100). Furthermore a rating of '00' has zero chance of a success and the player isn't even allowed to roll the dice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The table on 199 is not useful alone and same goes for the summary on table 200. Things are scattered in text and those two tables. 

 Attack and parry results on page 199 is missing things that are on other pages for example some short form of: "

"However, a weapon that parries a critical hit takes twice the damage it would take normally. 

If the attacking weapon is a long-hafted weapon or an impaling weapon, the parrying weapon takes no damage.

A shield that parries a critical hit receives twice as much damage as normal, and any unabsorbed damage strikes the parrying adventurer." plus possibly mention of 

"

a successful parry from a weapon or shield blocks the amount of damage it normally would." 

 

On page 200: 

Summary table is similar - it does not contain summary of all things necessary. 

for example it is mentioned "blocks to some degree".  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the dodge table on 201 is organised differently than page 199. 

Page 199 has defender on columns. page 201 has defender on rows.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clarification: on table page 200: does critical do maximum special damage plus maximum damage bonus. If not it could be mentioned that critical does maximum special damage plus normal damage bonus

 

p200 203 - mentions that critical ignores any armor. It does not state that it ignores also magical protection? Does it ignore that as well. 

 

Critical ignoring any armor etc would be good to be mentioned at the table page 199 

 

Perhaps the summaries should be combined... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unclarity on page 200 damage to weapons:

 

"Every time a weapon or shield takes damage more than its HP, it loses 1 hit point" -> in the example gargoyle's claw does 1 point of damage - should it be mentioned that gargoyle did 13 points of damage to get this 1 point of damage. Or how should this be interpreted. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Table on page 199: 

1) There are multiple variations on the text for 

"

Defender’s parrying weapon HP reduced
by the damage rolled. Any excess damage goes to adjacent hit location..."

Are they really all meant to be different.

Or could we synchronise those with page 198 

"if damage is higher than parrying weapon's hit points then reduce its hit points by 1 and pass the rest to adjacent hit location" 

-> and same for attacking side damages

2) what is the adjacent hit location meant in the table - is it always the weapon or shield arm. if so - can we say it so like in the previous page., If it is any adjacent - should it then be the rolled hit location as the target was trying to defend that...

3) will magical protection (shield, protection etc) protect the weapon/shield as well. This should be stated... If not - why not. 

4) 

"Defender’s parrying weapon takes damage over its HP, with same amount of damage going to adjacent hit location." 

Can we clarify this? So the attacker's special was 16 points. parrying weapon was 12. 4 goes to weapon hit points and 4 to adjacent hit location?  Or like the normal rule where 12 would be blocked 1 would go to weapon and 3 to body. or 12 would be blocked 1 would go to weapon and 4 would go thru as 12 was the blocked amount and 16 was the damage. Which of these is correct. Why  would this be such a special case?  

5) the normal attack vs special parry is a bit differently worded than special attack vs normal parry. Why would the damaged weapon take different damage when parried than attacked

 

and as mentioned in an earlier comment: 

"a weapon that parries a critical hit takes twice the damage it would take normally. " How about the other way round - why critical parry damage the attacking weapon in a different manner (roll special damage)

 

 

 

Edited by hkokko

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Page 200: "

successful parry vs unsuccessful attack "shield or parrying weapon’s damage " does this include damage bonus. How about weapon's bladesharp or similar damage. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ambiguity / lack of clarity:


Page 192/195: I can not find information about different speeds other than the standard melee movement of 24 meters per round. Is it not possible to run? Can not even the unengaged adventurers? I have not found any mention about it.

Page 223: Attacking While Prone - Describes the disadvantages of fighting from the ground but does not describe the maneuver necessary to get up off the ground. If the fall was due to a knockback occurred in MR 12 (page 224). In what strike rank is it possible to get up?

Thank you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please consider changing training time from a Season to gain 1d6-1 in a skill, or to learn a Sorcery spell to a week. Currently any cult requirement of an none box skill will take a character out of play for years. A quick calculation for LM shows that it would take 10 years of pure training and nothing else to become a priest.  Similarly a taking a Week to learn a Spirit Spell does not make a sense. Having ones priests occupied for weeks at a time teaching Initiates does not make sense. Perhaps it can be modified by a common divine spell of Spellteaching  which would work similar to Summon Spirit Teacher in that it cuts the learning time to a day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some credist are First name - Last name, and others, Last Name -First name. 
Not a big deal, but could be same for all. Would make it easier for people to recognize them later on.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

p. 53, Homeland Characteristic Modifiers table: There is no entry for the Pol-Joni; I assume they have no characteristic modifiers, but they should still appear in the table. Also, the Old Tarsh and Lunar Tarsh entries are reversed (Lunar Tarsh appears first everywhere else in the book).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Godlearner said:

Please consider changing training time from a Season to gain 1d6-1 in a skill, or to learn a Sorcery spell to a week. Currently any cult requirement of an none box skill will take a character out of play for years. A quick calculation for LM shows that it would take 10 years of pure training and nothing else to become a priest.  Similarly a taking a Week to learn a Spirit Spell does not make a sense. Having ones priests occupied for weeks at a time teaching Initiates does not make sense. Perhaps it can be modified by a common divine spell of Spellteaching  which would work similar to Summon Spirit Teacher in that it cuts the learning time to a day.

I make it 5 years. 2.5 per season, 5 seasons, 5*5*2.5=62.5 which with a decent knowledge bonus and vocational choice gets you 90. It's still a bit excessive though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Minor error on Page 210,  in the description of slashing weapons:

“Weapons used for hacking or slashing. These can be anything from the brute power of the axe to the relative finesse of the broadsword.”

But in the weapons table, broadsword is listed as a cut-and-thrust weapon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I list ambigous or confusable rules about combat.
There might be an overlap with what others pointed out.

A.--- Adjacent Hit Location
p.198 Successful Parry (first paragraph)
If more points of damage get through, those points go on to affect a hit location of the defender, determined randomly in the case of
a parrying weapon, or referring to the Shield Hit Location table (page 219). In most cases, a hit to a shield damages the arm wielding it.

p.198 Special Parries
- Against a critical attack, ... the defender's a hit location (likely the arm).
- Against a special attack, ... the defender’s adjacent hit location (likely the arm)

p.199 Attack & Parry Results (which hit location take damage)
                   Parry
                  Critical  Special   Normal    Failed
Critical Attack   affected  adjacent  adjacent  ?
Special Attack    -         affected  adjacent  ?
Normal Attack     -         -         affected  ?
Failed Attack     -         -         -         -

According to the former rule, whether it is a random hit location or an adjacent location depends on the type of weapon used for parry. But according the later rules and the result table it seems to depend on the success level. thus adjacent hit location rule is very ambiguous.

In my opinion, All "adjacent" in the later rule and the table clould be rewriten to "affected".

B.--- Special Parries vs Special and Critical Attack
p.198 Special Parries (first and second bullets)
- Against a critical attack, the parrying weapon takes 1 hit point of damage and any excess damage goes to the defender’s adjacent hit location (likely the arm).

- Against a special attack, the parrying weapon takes 1 hit point of damage if the rolled damage is higher than its current hit points. Any excess damage goes to the defender’s adjacent hit location (likely the arm), with no armor protection.

These rules are odd because special hit is more powerful than critical hit.
Should they be swapped?

C.--- Parrying a Critical Hit
p.200 Parrying a Critical Hit
Though the target’s armor does not subtract any damage from a critical hit, a successful parry from a weapon or shield blocks the amount of damage it normally would. However, a weapon that parries a critical hit takes twice the damage it would take normally. If the attacking weapon is a long-hafted weapon or an impaling weapon, the parrying weapon takes no damage.
    A shield that parries a critical hit receives twice as much damage as normal, and any unabsorbed damage strikes the parrying adventurer.

This rule section does not match any other rules text or the combat result tables.
This looks like the remnant of RQ2. Should all paragraphs be removed?

D.--- Maximum Damage
p.200 Summary of Combat Results (boxed text)
- A critical success ignores armor and does maximum special damage plus damage bonus.

p.206 Critical Hit
A critical hit ignores the effects of armor or any other protection, and does impaling, slashing, or crushing damage (depending on weapon type), as described above.

p.199 and p.201 Combat ResultTables
According to the combat result table, it seems that the maximum damage is applied only when the defense (parry or dodge) is failed.

There are three defferent rules about damage of critical hits.
Which rule is true?

E.--- Table orientation
p.199 Attack & Parry Results Table
The vertical headings of the table are attacks success levels, and the horizontal headings are parries.

p.201 Dodge Results Table
The vertical headings of the table are dodges, and the horizontal headings are attacks.

These two table do not correspond, so it might bring a confusion.
I think flipping the vertical and horizontal sides of the dodge table is good idea.

F.--- Dodge vs Critical Hit
p.201 Dodge Results
According the Dodge Results table, special and normal Dodge reduce the critical hit damage.
However, they are not written in the rule text. Could you add that description?

G.--- Two Parries
p.224 Two Weapon Use
Any adventurer using a weapon in each hand may use them for two attacks, two parries, or one attack and one parry.

There is no rule for two parries.

On the RQG rule, we can multiple parries by one weapon (with -20% cumulative penalty). What are the advantages about choosing two weapon parry? Can I calculate cumulative penalty separately with left and right hands?

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, hanataka said:

B.--- Special Parries vs Special and Critical Attack
p.198 Special Parries (first and second bullets)
- Against a critical attack, the parrying weapon takes 1 hit point of damage and any excess damage goes to the defender’s adjacent hit location (likely the arm).
- Against a special attack, the parrying weapon takes 1 hit point of damage if the rolled damage is higher than its current hit points. Any excess damage goes to the defender’s adjacent hit location (likely the arm), with no armor protection.

These rules are odd because special hit is more powerful than critical hit.
Should they be swapped?

Looks like just the "...with no armor protection" is on the wrong result. The rest of the text looks ok though, specials need to overcome the HP of the weapon and criticals do not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, PhilHibbs said:

Looks like just the "...with no armor protection" is on the wrong result. The rest of the text looks ok though, specials need to overcome the HP of the weapon and criticals do not.

You may be right. But the combat result table does not say so. It is still ambiguous.

p.199 Special parry vs Critical Attack
Defender’s parrying weapon takes 1 HP damage if rolled damage is greater than its current HP. Any excess damage
goes to adjacent hit location, with no armor protection.

Edited by hanataka

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Should Create Wall of Flames on p.392 be Summon Fire not Command? The description of the Technique and analogy with Call Light and Call Dark suggests it should. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Might be intentional but Speak to Mind p.398 lacks the Combine Technique unlike every other spell using two Runes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, CJ said:

Might be intentional but Speak to Mind p.398 lacks the Combine Technique unlike every other spell using two Runes.

Identify Spell, Identify Otherworld Entity, and Geomancy all have two runes and no Combine technique. So either all 4 are mistakes, or it isn't a general rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes seems to be the case when the Truth rune is used to understand something about another Rune.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not the best in English, but in sentence "...its edless uncertainty inspire you with..."  Ain't the "endless" demanding use of "inspires" ? (page 2). 
In sentence: by photographic, optical, electronic, or other media or methods of storage and retrival, is prohibited., Should it be retrieval? (page 2)
Pregenerated => Pre generated (page 3)
Not sure, but "...Each player plays their adventurer consistent..." could be written "them".  (page 5). 
"Rune affinities is always..." Should be "are". (Page 7, Everyone Has Magic). 
Not sure about this, but "By advancing within a cult, an adventurer gains magical power and important temporal resources". Should that be "gain"? (page 8, Cults). 
"them when captured, and avenges them when injured." Is the comma needed?
"...civilization they defend, and is rarely at home in the civilized world", Is comma needed? (Page 11, Heroes & Heroquesting)
Should "openended" be written "open-ended"? (Page 23, Getting Started. )
"Groundsmen". Should that be "groundmen"? (Page 26, Sartar)
"Dragonkind", should that be "Dragonkin"? (Page 26, Specific Passions Described)
"The most common of these groups is the clan.". Should that be "The clan is most common of these groups". (Page  28, Clans). 
"...and longterm marriages intended...", Should that be "long-term"? (page 33, Marriage). 
"In 1620, Farnan was one of the volunteer", Should that be "volunteers". (page 46, Vasana's Saga). 
"selfdefined", Should that be "self defined", (Page 50 , Harmony/Disorder runes. )
"Many wander from city to city, supporting themselves through teaching", Should that be "Wanders"? (page 70, Philosopher). 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, hanataka said:

G.--- Two Parries

 

p.224 Two Weapon Use
Any adventurer using a weapon in each hand may use them for two attacks, two parries, or one attack and one parry.

There is no rule for two parries.

On the RQG rule, we can multiple parries by one weapon (with -20% cumulative penalty). What are the advantages about choosing two weapon parry? Can I calculate cumulative penalty separately with left and right hands?

My guess is the first parry with each weapon is without penalty, and only Parries above those two first suffer from cumulative penalty, but that penalty applies to both weapon.

That is, you'll have one parry with full Right hand weapon skill, one with full Left hand weapon skill, and then a cumulative -20% for each parry afterwards, no matter what weapon you use for it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vasanas Saga, Page 82.  
That should be "her weapons are another 10 ENC"

"The total ENC for her armor is 9 ENC, that of
her weapons is another 10 ENC. Given that her
maximum ENC is only 14, Vasana cannot carry all
her weapons while wearing armor"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Risto Welling said:

Vasanas Saga, Page 82.  
That should be "her weapons are another 10 ENC"

"The total ENC for her armor is 9 ENC, that of her weapons is another 10 ENC. Given that her maximum ENC is only 14, Vasana cannot carry all her weapons while wearing armor"

"Is" is correct; the total encumbrance of her weapons (a singular value) is the subject of the clause.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...