Jump to content
Jason Durall

RuneQuest Core Rules Questions

Recommended Posts

On 1/27/2019 at 4:30 AM, Nevun said:

Sorry if this has been asked already.

SR cost for casting an attack spell while holding a weapon.

On pg. 194 it say "Most spirit magic or sorcery spells need at least one hand free. Because of this, 5 additional strike ranks must be added to an adventurer’s normal strike rank for a spell if they are switching from a weapon to the use of a spell in that melee round, so long as one hand remains free. This requirement does not apply to Rune spells. "

Does this assume the weapon is being put away? Or just dropped. The wording implies that you have to have your hand free so it's not just mentally changing your mindset from weapon to magic. Would there be an additional 5SR penalty to go back to melee afterwards? Readying the weapon again?

I'm not sure what is meant by "so long as one hand remains free". The way it reads the 5SR penalty DOES NOT apply if the hand is not free. Badly worded maybe?

Can anyone expand on this?

This is intentionally vague. Basically it means that if you don't have any means of focusing the spell, such as touching a focus inscribed somewhere on your person, you are at a penalty when switching gears mentally to move your hand to wherever the focus is at. If you want to say that a focus for Bladesharp is on the hilt of your sword and doesn't incur this penalty, then so be it. 

The rule assumes the weapon is removed from your hand in some fashion. Sheathing it is one way to handle that, but dropping it also works, though simply dropping a weapon at your feet is a terrible idea (potentially damaging blade or legs/feet). 

Feel free to just assume that your adventurers are always equipped with their foci in exactly the most advantageous place for combat and ignore this rule entirely. 

Answer added to Q&A

 

Edited by Scotty
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/31/2019 at 12:00 PM, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

First Aid healing skill has been added to RQG. To my knowledge this was first introduced in RQ3 which had slightly different rules for hit location damage. First Aid is applied to each individual wound once, which necessitates keeping track of individual hits/wounds. So a limb with 3 separate hits could have first aid applied 3 times, once for each individual wound.

My issue is with RQG following similar RQ2 hit location damage rules, we can have situation using the First Aid skill where blows to the limbs beyond the max x2 damage limit no longer register with the limb, but do however register with Total Hit points.

Is it intended that any further damage to Total Hitpoints received through subsequent hits to limbs (after x2 max dam limit ), will not be possible to heal with the First Aid skill?

Keep track of the individual injuries, not the hit point totals, and this isn't a problem.

You can't heal more HP to a particular wound through First Aid than was inflicted, whether that injury was inflicted to a specific wound or to total hit points.

Answer added to Q&A

Edited by Scotty
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/2/2019 at 9:45 AM, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

1. In opposed combat rolls, where one combatant has a combat skill over 100%, is it parry% or attack% over 100 that is used to figure out any penalty?  I ask because Parry% can vary from attack%, either through splitting attacks, or through the cumaltive parry penalty rule.

What are you trying to do when you're figuring a penalty? If you're attacking and the ability to attack is modified due to a penalty, use that. If you're trying to parry and your ability to parry is modified, use that. 

Quote

2. If a highly skilled combatant (150%) spilts their attack, does parry remain unaltered initially? For example an attack of 150% is split for two attacks of 75%. Does the parry remain at 150% before any culmaltive penalty? 

Split. You're diverting your focus into two 75% usages. Penalties should be applied to the 75%.

Answers added to Q&A

Edited by Scotty
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/9/2019 at 6:36 PM, PhilHibbs said:

Countermagic spirit spell:

Shield rune spell:

Does the order of casting of Countermagic and Shield matter?

If I cast Countermagic 1 then Shield 2, does the Countermagic get taken down by the shield? If I cast Countermagic 3 then Shield 2, would the Shield 2 be blocked?

Do I need to cast them in the other order, with the Countermagic powerful enough to get past the Shield? e.g., if I cast Shield 1, do I need to cast Countermagic 4 in order to get them to stack (as a spell lower than 4 points would normally be countered by the Shield's Countermagic 2)?

Or, do Countermagic and Shield always stack regardless of the order and power of the spells?

I think I covered this in Basic Roleplaying, but generally, a rule of thumb would be to start with the defender's body as being the closest/last line of defense, and then work outward. 

  • Protection 1st
  • Shield 2nd
  • Countermagic 3rd 

So then from an outside attack, these would be in reverse order, with the attack hitting Countermagic first, then Shield, then Protection.

Answer added to Q&A

Edited by Scotty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/12/2019 at 12:49 PM, CBDunkerson said:

1: Pg 167 says that mounts must be trained separately to; accept a rider, remain calm in battle, fight in battle and increase their three attack skills up to 50% below the trainer's ride skill. Training to accept a rider is stated to take a week. How long do the other types of training take?

The other types of training takes many months, if not years. This can depend hugely on the culture, the environment, the amount of attention provided, and the facilities. 

Quote

Also, does a war trained mount immediately get 50% below the trainer's skill in attacks or does that have to be trained separately (or separately for each attack)?

 

Those are general guidelines. Assume that when a fully-trained warhorse is purchased it will be trained at those levels. If you for some reason desire more granularity, please ask your gamemaster.

Answers added to Q&A

Edited by Scotty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/12/2019 at 12:49 PM, CBDunkerson said:

2: Is Martial Arts treated like a weapon for special and critical success purposes? That is, does a critical Martial Arts roll do max damage and bypass armor?

You don't roll Martial Arts. It's a threshold. 

If you have a Martial Arts skill of 30% and, say, Fist 75%, any roll of Fist equaling 01-30 triggers the benefits of Martial Arts, and any roll of 31-75 is just a normal Fist attack. 

If your original attack roll is a special/crit AND it is below your Martial Arts skill, then you apply the benefits of the Martial Arts skill (double damage, normal damage bonus). 

Similarly, anyone can parry with a limb, but if the Parry roll is less than the Martial Arts skill, then it blocks 6 points of damage.

Answer added to Q&A

Edited by Scotty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/14/2019 at 10:51 PM, Glorion said:

Can a Trickster casting Hallucination see a door in a wall for example that nobody else can see, and walk through it? I'm hoping the answer is yes, as that sort of thing was a favorite of my old RQ2 Trickster. I called it "the roadrunner spell."

That would be an extraordinarily powerful 1-pt spell. 

As a gamemaster, I'd rule that yes, they could cast the spell and open that illusory door. What's on the other side of that door, if anything... that's the chance the trickster takes.

Answer added to Q&A

Edited by Scotty
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The game states "Using an atlatl makes a javelin slower to use (it must be reloaded)".

This is not reflected in the actual rules (same speed for Javelin and Atlatl, 1/MR).

Is this an oversight? I have houseruled it to 1/2R (especially for balance purposes, as the Atlatl is otherwise just better), but it would be nice to see a ruling. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand the Phalanx rules.

P. 222:

[1] "Fighters in a phalanx lose the ability to Dodge but may parry as many attacks as they receive."

[2] "The fighter on the far right side (the weapon side) corner is penalized by –10% to all shield parries they attempt. Fighters in phalanx formation cannot attack or parry opponents to the rear without breaking formation and turning around."

[3] "Each melee round that an adventurer in phalanx formation is attacked, the adventurer’s player has two options, to stay in formation or to break formation and parry. Each is described below. [...]"

So can you parry while in formation, or not? The first quote is explicit that you can. The second heavily implies it, as there would be no point to penalties to parries if they were impossible. But then the third quote indicates that you only get to parry if you break formation. 

The only explanation I can come up with that makes any sense is that while in formation, you get the modified "auto-parry to body part" parry (but not any other parries), and that if you break formation, you get the regular parries instead (and also dodge?). But this doesn't explain what the point is of talking about penalties to shield parry rolls (rightmost guy) that he doesn't get to make in the first place. Or does that guy get to make regular shield parries, unlike all the others? 

If the rightmost guy can't parry and can't dodge and also don't get any cover from a shield from the guy to the right (as there is no such person), that spot is an absolute deathtrap with no defenses possible at all except that the left arm gets protected by the shield. Perhaps the idea is to allow him (alone in the phalanx) shield parries, albeit at -10%? It also seems a bit odd that he can't make weapon parries, as there's no-one to his right getting in the way of the weapon parry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also about Phalanx: If you get a (Enc 2) weapon impaled in a shield, the shield becomes useless. But what exactly does "useless" mean here? Simply that the guy to your left doesn't get the shield cover from it? If you drop from six people to five in a (very small) shield wall, does that means the formation breaks up as it's no longer legal?

Funnily enough, getting a javelin (Enc 1) impaled in your shield has no effect when you're in a phalanx, as it halves your skill, which is immaterial while in a phalanx.

Supposedly, two Enc 1 weapons lodged in your shield should count as Enc 2 for shield purposes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clarification needed concerning how weapons should be mapped to weapon skills:

The melee weapons skills in character sheet mix weapons names and categories. For example:
- Skill: Kopis (specific weapon in category of 1H Sword).
- Skill: 1H Mace (a weapon category including 1H Hammer, Heavy Mace, Light Mace, Singlestick, and Wooden Club).
- Skill: Javelin (Javelin is both weapon name and category. Which one does the skill on the character sheet refer to?).

The character sheet is also completely missing any skills for all 2H Maces and 2H Swords as well as Thrown Rock and Staff Sling. These could be easily implemented as custom skills, but as the skills on the character sheet mix categories and specific weapons, it becomes unclear whether the new skill should be named by weapon category or by specific weapon.

For example: If a character decides to start training with a Greatsword, what skill should be used? Would the skill name be  Greatsword, or 2H Sword?

What would be the generalized rule for creating new weapons and weapon skills? By category or by specific weapon?

The Melee Weapon (All) skill description on page 186 states that "Each melee weapon has its own specific skill." This seems like a very concrete rule, but the character sheet as it is now, is not following it. Based on this, I assume that character sheet is in error, but some official statement regarding this would be welcome.

Edited by MMan
Fixed typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/15/2019 at 11:55 AM, Michael Cule said:

Another shaman related question:

This is four questions. 

Quote

The spirit spell Control [Entity] is one that shamans will find useful. However, I need to know how specific that spell is when applied to spirits. 

I've already told my shaman player that there can't be a single Control Spirit which works on everything but I need to know how far he will have to specialise.

Look to the Bestiary. You might break it down to Animal Spirits, Demons, Disease Spirits, Healing Spirits, Plant Spirits, Ghosts, Guardian Spirits, Landscape Spirits, Nymphs, etc. 

Quote

The description implies that there is a separate Control for Elementals. Does this also imply a separate Control Fire Elemental, Control Wind Elemental etc? 

Yes. It's Control Cult Spirit, which is usually specialized by type. 

Quote

Is a discorporate human spirit a different thing if it's living or dead? Do Wraiths need their own spell? What about nature spirits? Help!

Yes, a discorporated human is a discorporated human, not technically a spirit. A human's spiritual being whose "owner" is dead is a ghost or a wraith. Different things. Nature spirits are spirits.

Answers added to Q&A

Edited by Scotty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/16/2019 at 5:58 PM, Michael Cule said:

How does one set up a new shrine for a Rune cult?

The book talks about this being a thing one might be asked to do by one's cult but only details of how to start a spirit shrine are given.

This is a task beyond any hard-and-fast rules set. You'll need to work with your gamemaster to determine the costs of the physical location, the social/civil negotiation required to build it, the procurement of labor and materials, and the process of having a Rune Priest or God-talker come in and Sanctify the place. If in doubt, consider it a case of casting a multi-point Sanctify with Extension to last at least a year. The particular god may have requirements above and beyond these, such as Ernalda demanding an underground chamber, Yelm an eternal fire, etc. 

The upcoming RuneQuest Campaign Guide contains a bit more about temples and shrines, with some ballpark prices, but does not go into great detail.

Answer added to Q&A

Edited by Scotty
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/10/2019 at 3:27 PM, Michael Cule said:

Yet more to try your patience.

On page 416 we read:

To have a chance at improving a skill though training, an adventurer must train with an instructor for an entire season, and can do little else.

Does that mean:

No adventuring that season? 
No practicing your profession that season? (And forgoing the professional and cult skill improvement chances mentioned in the previous paragraph.)

You can make experience rolls, but you can't do anything else that would take your mind away from practice.

No practicing your profession, no training other abilities, etc. It's a full-time regimen of study.

Certainly not adventuring.

Answer added to Q&A

Edited by Scotty
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/16/2019 at 9:22 PM, raskal said:

The rule says "Who goes first and in what order during a melee round is determined by strike ranks". But in phase 2. "Movement of Non-Engaged Characters" in which order the move of unengaged characters and monsters is made ?

Use common sense. If in doubt or to resolve a tie, use MOV rate or DEX as the determiner (higher goes first).

Answer added to Q&A

Edited by Scotty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/17/2019 at 2:43 AM, CBDunkerson said:

The Spirit Binding spell (pg 265) states;

I couldn't find any information about 'special cult-bred animals' in the Spirits chapter.

This (poorly) refers to the practice for cults to have animals sacred to that god kept and bred within the temple grounds. Ernalda temples are likely full of snakes, Orlanthi temples might keep a sacred cattle pen, Eiritha cows, Engizi a pool of fish, Issaries maybe birds, etc. 

Eurmal would have a bunch of raccoons who run around loose and get into other temples, because they're like that. 

Quote

What is this meant to refer to? The 'allied spirits' gained by rune master sound similar, but those are said to be sent by the god and have different listed abilities than bound spirits. At that, the term 'familiar' appears in the text of this spell and nowhere else in the book. Is a familiar the same thing as a spirit bound animal as described on page 250, or something else?

Yes, a familiar is a bound spirit animal.

Answers added to Q&A

Edited by Scotty
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/3/2019 at 12:02 PM, Black Knight said:

The starting equipment for Noble characters (p.70) does not include any armour on abdomen hit location, as Bronze (Plate) Cuirass only protects chest. The same problem is with the character Harmast (p.88), whose equipment is based on this list. Notably, the Harmast's hit location table (p.89) still incorrectly states that he has 6 AP on abdomen.

I suppose the "Bronze/Plate Cuirass" on both these places should actually be Bronze Plate, Segmented (according to the table on p.215).

Yes, read that as a hauberk.

It's been corrected in Harmast's writeup for future publications. 

Answer added to Q&A

Edited by Scotty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/10/2019 at 7:47 PM, CBDunkerson said:

Is the Restore Health rune spell intended to be the only way of recovering lost characteristic points? The Core rulebook doesn't seem to list any way of naturally recovering from disease and other things that cause characteristic loss.

Unless contradicted in the rules, assume one characteristic point is restored each season a successful CONx5 roll is made. If the characteristic point loss lasts beyond a year, it is not recovered. See the rules for recovering from Blotches (page 155) for a specific instance of this recovery rate. 

Answer added to Q&A

Edited by Scotty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/8/2019 at 7:42 AM, HreshtIronBorne said:

How do the Shaman Ability Spell Barrage and the Common Divine Spell Multispell interact with each other?

They would stack, if the gamemaster allows it. 

When trying to stack them, determine which are the Multispelled spells and which are the ones due to Spell Barrage.

The Multispells are treated as separate instances and the Barrage is all-or-nothing.

Answer added to Q&A

Edited by Scotty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/16/2019 at 10:37 AM, Brootse said:

Can non-Sorcery spells be cast upon the Sorcery spell Protective Circle?

Yes.

Quote

And can Boon of Kargan Tor be cast on the Protective Circle?

Was the first line of the spell description - "This spell must be cast on a weapon." - unclear?

Answers added to Q&A

Edited by Scotty
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/17/2019 at 3:30 PM, LivingTriskele said:

Four Phases in a Melee Round (p. 192)

I'm a little confused by the logic of putting the movement of non-engaged characters (phase 2) before the resolution of missile attacks and spells (phase 3).

In this I must defer to the prior designers of the game (Steve Perrin, Greg Stafford, and company). It's been that way since RQ1 and making such a fundamental change to the mechanics of combat was both outside the design goal and something Jeff and I weren't interested in doing. 

 

Quote

If I'm reading this correctly, a non-engaged melee combatant can move half his/her movement, close in on a target that is armed with a missile weapon, and attack before that target gets a chance to fire. Wouldn't it make more sense to have phase 2 include both the movement of non-engaged characters AND the resolution of missiles and spells?

It is, I believe, very specifically to keep things relatively clear and to disincentivize ranged combatants from getting within movement range of melee opponents

Quote

Maybe abolish theses phases all together and just go with Strike Rank order?

If that makes things easier for you, Your RuneQuest May Vary.

Answers added to Q&A

Edited by Scotty
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/17/2019 at 9:45 PM, Bill the barbarian said:

I am bit unsure how to count the missile strike ranks. If PC's DEX SR is 2, do I count it like:

2 (shoot) + 5 (loading a new missile) + 2 (shoot), which would give strike ranks 2 / 9 (third shot not allowed)

If they are ready to shoot on SR2 with an arrow in hand, then yes. 

Quote

or

2 (shoot) + 5 (loading a new missile + shoot) +  5 (loading a new missile + shoot), which would give strike ranks 2 / 7 / 12

or

a a PC DEX SR  of 0 (DEX 19+), so you could potentially go on

1 (shoot) 6 (shoot) 11(shoot)  depending on how you interpret DEX SR 0.
This question and which solution is correct especially as regards SR 0 has bothered my since pre-internet BBS only days!

Nope.

Answer added to Q&A

Edited by Scotty
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/20/2019 at 11:11 PM, Bill the barbarian said:

In regards to Multispelling a disrupt spell. The rules as to Multispelling non-compatible spirtit spells state that ..

"The only exception to this is the Disruption spell, which can be combined with itself and resolved as one attack doing 2D3 damage to one hit location:"

all emphasis mine

1) One can infer that seeing as the spell is stackable one can take the italicized text and add a d3 per point of stacking. But is that inferance correct
 i.e. stacking twice for cost of 2 RP results in one attack doing 3d3 points of damage to one hit location at a cost of 2 MPs. 

2) Or does stacking allow one to toss another doubled disrupt per stacking at another target (another inference)?

Multispell (1 pt.) costs 1 Rune point to cast. Disruption costs 1 magic point per use. Spending 1 Rune point and 2 magic points lets you cast a double-strength Disruption spell. 

If you spend 2 Rune points, you can add another casting of Disruption to the mix, for a total of 2 Rune points and 3 magic points to cast a 3D3 Disruption spell. 

This continues per additional Rune point spent. 

Answer added to Q&A

Edited by Scotty
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay this is a long post so I'm hoping that I can make it clear. 

On 3/22/2019 at 4:30 PM, g33k said:

SR's, Engagement, Statement of Intent --

Some character, C, makes a SoI that they will move past a potential foe, F, to engage a BigBad (outside the scope of these questions).

C has a very-high DEX, acting early in the round.

F is already Engaged in an ongoing melee with another character, R (who may react to what happens below); F's SoI is attack & defend vs R.

F has a very-high SR, acting late in the round.

DirectorGM:  Action!

C moves into melee range of F, intending to move past.

Q1:  Are C&F automatically "Engaged"?

No. They're not paying attention to one another. They're participating in the same combat, though. 

What's the area the combat is taking place in? How close is C getting to F? You say "move past" but does that mean within weapon range of F or does it mean three meters away? 

Is there some reason that C can't get to BB without interfering with F, who is otherwise occupied? Why can't C make their move and keep F and R out of it?  

There's too much unknown here, and unless you're breaking out the battlemat or using minis, the gamemaster needs to make some decisions about what's happening vs. relying on guidelines. 

 

Quote

Q2:  If Q1 is "Yes" does C need to Knockback/Disengage/Flee (vs F) to continue moving past?  Is that implicit in C's SoI?

See the above. 

Quote

Q3:  If Q2 is "Yes" and C chooses to "Flee" does F get an unopposed attack, even though attacking C (or anyone attempting to move-by) was not part of their SoI?

Q4:  If Q3 is"Yes" -- Does F's attack on C occur on F's SR (even though C's movement "happened" on an earlier SR), or on one of the SR's-worth of Movement that C declared?

Q5:  If F attacked C on Q3/Q4, what happens to F's SoI & their SoI-declared attack on R?  Did they "use up" their action attacking C; or is that a "free" attack?

If you decide that for some reason C's movement is the equivalent of disengaging from F (when they're not actively paying attention to one another), then that attack is as described on page 195, a free attack which cannot be parried or dodged. This should be immediate and not affect the attacker's normal SR action. 

 

Quote

Q6:  R (whose SoI was "Murderize F without being murderized back") is feeling really left out, and wonders if he gets any chance to react to all the stuff F is doing with C, any advantage from C's distraction, multiple-Engagement, etc...  and if so, what reactions/advantages?

If F has become engaged with C due to your interpretation of the situation, they could also take a free attack at C if they felt like it. 

Answers added to Q&A

Edited by Scotty
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
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.

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...