Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hmm, I was going to post this in What the Heck... Check that out but this is not really a whizz bang earthshaking, What the heck, check that out… pat pend ™ thing , or even a really new and groundbreaking rule so I thought it worth another thread.

I have seen it mentioned that RQ G lacks an Encumbrance system on a few threads now, or a little confusion on others. Seems that they kinda have ENC rules or really near option/suggestions with rules tacked on. 

Back in RQ2 days they had a common sense approach to encumbrance. Don’t carry more than you can…. but if you do and need a measuring stick they offered a neat idea of things weighing either one thing or two (depending on the number of hands required to carry the thing, I believe) . This has been brought back with either CON or STR setting the upper limit on the number of things one could carry (kinda), It is  (only a little) more complicated than this so I think rather than quoting the whole skill I will send interested parties to the RQ RiG book page 150 and 15. In short it reads

ENC Penalties 
Every point of ENC an adventurer carries over their maximum ENC causes them to suffer the following penalties: 
–1 from Movement (MOV) 
–5% from all skills in the Agility, Manipulation, Stealth, and Weapon skill categories 
and more follows…

I believe i might be the only human on the planet that liked RQ 3 ENC rules and even used them (gasp) and I did not mind the thing approach of RQ 2 so really I think I will be using the rules in the future for RQ RiG but it's early games at the moment so I told the players to set phasers on ignore when it came to ENC, for the moment anyway.

How about the Chaosium agora and its literati: comments, hates, likes, comments about ducks...

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

I count four of us,  oops make that three (splitter!).

That being considered  numerous reminds me of a joke I once heard of a Yelmalian patrol spotting a trollkin disappearing over a hill, and sending a young lad to go after it for a spot of training in the field. The patrol stood down to await the young victor's return when horrifying screams were heard followed by sobs and then... nothing! The leader sends a couple of larger lads to follow, with similar results. Pissed, the leader sends his 4 best men. After a long and agonizing period of time rent by sounds of desperate combat, screams, flashes of light from a blizzard of spells—when finally one battered, bloodied and bruised soldier staggers back, collapses at the leader's sandals and croaks...

"It were an ambush, yer lordship! Twas two o' them".

Edited by Bill the barbarian
spelin
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Kloster said:

It seems we were more numerous that it seemed.

True.

I count 3 of you in this thread... maybe 3.5 if we consider PhilHibbs' praise of the "Endurance" spell to be halfway-endorsing RQ3's Encumbrance rules.  But not jps -- they only wondered about the GM's book, they didn't actually say they liked the rules.

😏

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

There are small differences, I will check that right now..., IN RQ 2, STR x 1.5 is the upper limit of things that can be carried while in RQ G there does not seem to be an upper limit. Mistake? Although, seeing as MOV takes a one point penalty per things over Maximum ENC I would imagine humans can only carry 7 things over MAX ENC and  hope to move at a blistering 1 MOV/SR. 8 and they are dead in the water, as a duck might t say.

As RQ 2 did not have dodge, the dodge rules are new to RQ RiG. So correct, just about the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It bugs me that armor doesn’t have any effect on Movement. Maybe I’m mistaken, but it seems like some types of troops historically went less armored to improve their speed and mobility. peltasts for example are famed for being lightly armored and highly mobile. That mobility helps them outmaneuver heavier troop types like hoplites.

From what I can see in RQG, there isn’t any really penalty to wearing armor and carrying a bunch until you entirely exceed your ENC limits.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, daskindt said:

It bugs me that armor doesn’t have any effect on Movement. Maybe I’m mistaken, but it seems like some types of troops historically went less armored to improve their speed and mobility. peltasts for example are famed for being lightly armored and highly mobile. That mobility helps them outmaneuver heavier troop types like hoplites.

From what I can see in RQG, there isn’t any really penalty to wearing armor and carrying a bunch until you entirely exceed your ENC limits.

From what I've read and heard from people who have fought in armor, it should only hinder your movements if it doesn't fit or is badly made. The biggest problem is fatigue, since wearing heavier armors gets really tiring quickly. Light infantry don't wear armor to outspeed or outmaneuver the heavier units, but so they don't wear out as fast as their opponents.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, daskindt said:

From what I can see in RQG, there isn’t any really penalty to wearing armor and carrying a bunch until you entirely exceed your ENC limits.

Have not had the pleasure of trying RQ RiG ENC yet but carrying a bunch and wearing armour was a pretty effective way of gaining fatigue penalties in RQ3, I imagine it is a bit less of an issue in RQ RiG but I do note that Armour weighs more things than weapons for the most part so it might just push you into encumbrance faster. Hopefully we will be getting news back from folks who have used the ENC rules as written in their games and can therefore comment.with experience.

Alas, if your disappointed, seeing as people generally hate the nitty gritty of RQ3 Encumbrance rolls don't expect them to get more complicated any time soon in RQ RiG.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Bill the barbarian said:

I believe i might be the only human on the planet that liked RQ 3 ENC rules and even used them (gasp)

I liked them too.

 

32 minutes ago, daskindt said:

It bugs me that armor doesn’t have any effect on Movement. Maybe I’m mistaken, but it seems like some types of troops historically went less armored to improve their speed and mobility. peltasts for example are famed for being lightly armored and highly mobile.

TArmor  doesn't really slow people down. A guy in full armor can run just as fast as someone in no armor. He just can't do it for as long because, the armor will tire him out.. 

Quote

That mobility helps them outmaneuver heavier troop types like hoplites.

That has more to do with Hoplites having to move in in a very rigid phalanx formation than in the armor actually reducing their speed. 

 

Edited by Atgxtg
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

TArmor  doesn't really slow people down. A guy in full armor can run just as fast as someone in no armor. He just can't do it for as long because, the armor will tire him out.. 

Its not simply "tiring" someone out. Heat buildup is a bitch (short term fatigue), and this can occur just from being in full kit standing in the sun. 

Count me as someone who liked the RQ3 method too. It really didn't take too long to tic off a point at the end of each round, or to do the subtraction during those few fights where fatigue really came into play. It also gave the GM a more solid hook to say something along the lines of "You've been traveling through the Wastes for a while now, with the sun beating down on your head and now you have to fight that group of nomads over there to get to the water. Halve your fatigue points for this fight"... or some such.

SDLeary

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, SDLeary said:

Its not simply "tiring" someone out. Heat buildup is a bitch (short term fatigue), and this can occur just from being in full kit standing in the sun. 

Yes but heat doesn't slow you down. At least not directly. It's the fact that it causies you to spend more expengry (and use more water. water) 

Quote

 

Count me as someone who liked the RQ3 method too. It really didn't take too long to tic off a point at the end of each round, or to do the subtraction during those few fights where fatigue really came into play. It also gave the GM a more solid hook to say something along the lines of "You've been traveling through the Wastes for a while now, with the sun beating down on your head and now you have to fight that group of nomads over there to get to the water. Halve your fatigue points for this fight"... or some such.

SDLeary

It would be easy to do something similar. I think what most people disliked was the math of -1% per round to skills. One way would be a CONx5% roll every so often (say 10 rounds) to avoid a penalty like -10%. The CON x5% (Stamina roll?) could be modified by ENC-STRx5%. Which could be worked out beforehand. This would give you RQ3 like fatigue without ticking off the points or messing with 1% adjustments. 

 

Or, if someone doesn't like the roll, they could just have it be -10% every STR+CON-ENC rounds. 

 

Edited by Atgxtg
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, g33k said:

True.

I count 3 of you in this thread... maybe 3.5 if we consider PhilHibbs' praise of the "Endurance" spell to be halfway-endorsing RQ3's Encumbrance rules.  But not jps -- they only wondered about the GM's book, they didn't actually say they liked the rules.

😏

Considering the comments, I thought the number was nil (or close to) outside of my group. 3.5 in one thread is numerous compared to that nil. I liked the details it provided, but I don't miss the fatigue rules that went with it. We used it and the bookkeeping was too much even for my crunchyness.

And this is 4.5, not 3.5. I reread jps and he likes too (I don't count those who wrote after my comment).

Edited by Kloster
reread jps
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Kloster said:

Considering the comments, I thought the number was nil (or close to) outside of my group. 3.5 in one thread is numerous compared to that nil. I liked the details it provided, but I don't miss the fatigue rules that went with it. We used it and the bookkeeping was too much even for my crunchyness.

And this is 4.5, not 3.5. I reread jps and he likes too (I don't count those who wrote after my comment).

Nonetheless, Greg and I both disliked the Fatigue rules in RQ3 intensely. They are not going to come back in any official capacity. If you want to houserule more complicated Fatigue and Encumbrance rules, go for it, but RQG's rules do what we want them to do.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Jeff said:

Nonetheless, Greg and I both disliked the Fatigue rules in RQ3 intensely. They are not going to come back in any official capacity. If you want to houserule more complicated Fatigue and Encumbrance rules, go for it, but RQG's rules do what we want them to do.

Thanks Jeff for the information. I don't plan to do anything with the fatigue rules, I said that I like the old encumbrance rules, and used the fatigue but don't liked it. Too bad, the two of them were linked.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Bill the barbarian said:

I believe i might be the only human on the planet that liked RQ 3 ENC rules and even used them (gasp)

We used them, in the RQ3+ I played. I broadly like them more than RQG's generally because of how it quantifies all the annoying nonsense you're carrying around. Each has its own advantages. We didn't use really Fatigue though because didn't want to do the bookkeeping. Our process was that we calculated Fatigue, and then if you were carrying more ENC than Fatigue you got the excess as a flat penalty to basically everything. I don't know if that was part of RQ3's default rules or not. And, some skills (mostly Magic & Agility skills I think) had a flat penalty of your total ENC.

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.
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...