From: owner-runequest-rules@ (RuneQuest Rules Digest) To: runequest-rules-digest@lists.MPGN.COM Subject: RuneQuest Rules Digest V1 #185 Reply-To: runequest-rules@mpgn.com Sender: owner-runequest-rules@ Errors-To: owner-runequest-rules@ Precedence: bulk RuneQuest Rules Digest Friday, October 16 1998 Volume 01 : Number 185 RuneQuest is a trademark of Hasbro/Avalon Hill Games. All Rights Reserved. TABLE OF CONTENTS [RQ-RULES] Converging two excelent projects RE: [RQ-RULES] BFRP - Characteristics RE: [RQ-RULES] game complexity RE: [RQ-RULES] category modifiers RE: [RQ-RULES] BFRP Combat skill mechanics [RQ-RULES] RQ Skills & Task Systems [RQ-RULES] %-based Skill Difficulty RE: [RQ-RULES] RQ Skills & Task Systems RE: [RQ-RULES] %-based Skill Difficulty Re: [RQ-RULES] BFRP skills rules Re: [RQ-RULES] category modifiers Re: [RQ-RULES] Skill difficulties RE: [RQ-RULES] BFRP skills rules Re: [RQ-RULES] BFRP Project Organization RULES OF THE ROAD 1. Do not include large sections of a message in your reply. Especially not to add "Yeah, I agree" or "No, I disagree." Or be excoriated. If someone writes something good and you want to say "good show" please do. But don't include the whole message you praise. 2. Use an appropriate Subject line. 3. Learn the art of paraphrasing: Don't just quote and comment on a point-by-point basis. 4. No anonymous posting, please. Don't say something unless you're ready to stand by it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 12:15:40 +0100 From: Sergio Mascarenhas Subject: [RQ-RULES] Converging two excelent projects It?s interesting that two discussion groups where I'm (mostly passively) involveld, the RQ list and the Jorune list, got in the same wave of mind at the same time: both are dealing the the question of how to keep alive game systems that are moribund; both are discussing actively how to change a legacy of the past (RQ in one case, and the Jorune game system in the other) in order to provide-it with a future; and both are focusing the discussion both on the rules and the gameworld supported by those rules. Can I sugest that both initiatives start a common dialog? Maybe they can converge into a single project, which would not only save development effort (avoiding duplication in two separate projects), but raise the likelyhood of success (its easier to have success in a project then in two projects). What's more - an can convince both groups that it makes sense to dialog - the 2nd ed. Jorune game system was very close to a variance of Basic Role Playing, the basis of Runequest. My proposal would be: As discussed in the RQ list, the game system would be based on BRP, and the development would use as primary inspiration both RQ and Jorune 3rd. ed. Secondary inspiration could be drawn from other BRP systems and from Jorune 3rd ed. Jorune would be choosed as the basic game world the system: from Jorune adepts POV, it would be the game system; from RQ adepts POV, it would be a viable testing ground. For RQers: If you don't know Jorune, I can tell you that it's one of the most fascinating gameworlds I know. Yes, it's on a par with Glorantha (with the only difference that Glorantha has more support - which generates more materials - then Jorune). If you think that the idea has merit and don't know the other list, they can be reached this way: RQ rules digest - send a mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the message subscribe runequest-rules. Jorune list - send a mail to jorune-l@lists.io.com with the message subscribe jorune-l or to XRadioJoe@aol.com which I think is running the list. Sergio *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 11:41:58 +0100 From: "Hibbs, Philip" Subject: RE: [RQ-RULES] BFRP - Characteristics >This would mean that when I ask everyone to roll on their DEXx5%, >some characters will always have 100% which is no fun (IMHO). Ringworld used 2d6+6 for all attributes, and Stat x 3 was the normal roll, giving average 39%. Stat x 4 would give 52%, from 32% to 72%. That way, only elves with Int 24 get up to 96% on an INT roll. philip.hibbs@tnt.co.uk http://members.tripod.com/~PhilHibbs/ Any view of things that is not strange is false - Neil Gaiman, Sandman *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 11:29:39 +0100 From: "Hibbs, Philip" Subject: RE: [RQ-RULES] game complexity >How long does it take to roll 7 stats on 2D6, calculate a damage >modifier and HP total and allocate 500 points to a list of skills? Depends on the group. My players at Wolves are hard work, one's a "slow reader", another is out pf phase with reality, and another is just cantankerous. >Magic is a bit more complicated, but that's why it takes 30 minutes >as against 15. I'm impressed, I presume the players are all experienced roleplayers. philip.hibbs@tnt.co.uk http://members.tripod.com/~PhilHibbs/ Any view of things that is not strange is false - Neil Gaiman, Sandman *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 11:45:43 +0100 From: "Hibbs, Philip" Subject: RE: [RQ-RULES] category modifiers >How about keeping the categories, but not claculating anything. You >get +15% in one category, +10% in another, +5% in another, +0% in >two and -5% in the last. You choose. I presume that you are counting attack/parry as being *the same* as manipulation and/or agility, not just *the same calculation*, in RQ they are technically not the same category, they are just calculated the same way. philip.hibbs@tnt.co.uk http://members.tripod.com/~PhilHibbs/ Any view of things that is not strange is false - Neil Gaiman, Sandman *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 12:19:48 +0100 From: "Hibbs, Philip" Subject: RE: [RQ-RULES] BFRP Combat skill mechanics I like the Double Trouble system, to summarise what Bruce says: 01 = Critical Double Success = Special 00 = Fumble Double Fail = Minor Fumble Special and Critical need to be really good, as they are lower chance than in RQ (half the chance of a special, and up to a fifth the chance of a critical. Minor Fumbles should not be too bad, as they are more common than RQ fumbles, but a 00 can be as bad as they come! The old cut-the-fumble-table-in-half can be used. philip.hibbs@tnt.co.uk http://members.tripod.com/~PhilHibbs/ Any view of things that is not strange is false - Neil Gaiman, Sandman *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 04:55:36 -0700 (PDT) From: "John R. Snead" Subject: [RQ-RULES] RQ Skills & Task Systems Hi- I snagged this off of the Glorantha list a year or so ago, and think it might be an excellent addition to the new RQ project. One of my problems with the base system is that skill rolls are often far to low. An experienced Butcher, Orator, Scribe, or other Professional should not fail 20% or even 10% of the time on ordinary tasks. OTOH, difficult tasks should be difficult. When looked at in a real-world fashion skilled professionals almost never fail at routine or even mildly challenging tasks (who often does a competent Doctor fail to set a simple fracture correctly, my guess would be much less frequently than 5% of the time Unless we assume every skilled professional has a 96+% at skills some rule like that below is both helpful and adds more depth to the game (especially since difficult tasks now become *very* challenging, even for the highly skilled. The following is by allen wallace Task levels most actions will have a task level, with a numerical value, generally between (1) and (100) If your skill is twice the task level you must roll below the fumble range for success. If your skill is equal to the task level you must roll a standard success. If your skill is less than the task level you must roll a special success If your skill is less than half of the task level you must roll a critical success Task level Description 5 Easy 15 Routine 30 Moderate 60 Difficult 90 Very Difficult Task Levels and Magick If skill level is twice task level a normal success must still be rolled, at this point magic point cost is reduced to 1 on a special roll and not a critical roll. Ritual magic: Varies by ritual, generally 20% to 60% Sorcerers: Task level is manipulation points times 10% (This is for each type of manipulation, intensity, duration etc. ) Spell success is a simple roll (will probably go task also) Shaman: Simple roll only, POW x5 (+ magic bonus) Adepts: Task level is the magic point cost times 5% Mage Adepts: Task level is OP times 20% Ceremony adds to the effective skill level thus effectively reduces the task level. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 08:29:37 -0400 (EDT) From: Peter Maranci Subject: [RQ-RULES] %-based Skill Difficulty This may have already been suggested, but I just had an idea on how to have skills of differing difficulty without tiresome lists. Why not reduce the base number for all skills, but have that base number be the maximum that you can gain from an experience roll? In other words, the base skill for Sword Attack, say, would be 3%. A successful skill check would allow the character to roll a d6 for experience gain, but that gain could not be more than 3%. The more difficult a skill, the lower the base. Most bases would have to be adjusted downward, of course, and skills which presently have a zero base would need to either be changed to 1% or otherwise handled (perhaps the base would only apply once the skill was acquired). This would solve the problem of over-rapid skill increase. It would also allow base skills to reflect the full percentile system of RQ3. And rather than have merely three grades of difficulty, there would effectively be six. The character generation system would have to be adjusted a bit, to balance off the lower base skills. Still, that wouldn't be very complicated. What do you think? -->Pete - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Maranci pmaranci@tiac.net Malden, MA Editor, Interregnum RPG/Science Fiction APA/magazine -- email for info. Interregnum WWW home page: http://www.tiac.net/users/maranci/index.html FRP adventures, art and more: http://www.tiac.net/users/maranci/rq.htm Associate Ed. of Tradetalk, magazine of the International Chaos Society *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 13:25:17 +0100 From: "Hibbs, Philip" Subject: RE: [RQ-RULES] RQ Skills & Task Systems >An experienced Butcher, Orator, Scribe, or other Professional >should not fail 20% or even 10% of the time on ordinary tasks. I agree, but on most days a butcher would never bother rolling on their skill. Only if they, for example, acquire a badly-slaughtered beast would they have to roll to salvage the majority of the animal and make good cuts out of it. A failed roll would probably yield half of the meat in the animal as offcuts fit only for mince. However, this is not the kind of situation that BFRP is trying to simulate. Die rolls should only be required where the task is moderately difficult, and very difficult tasks should have a skill chance penalty. All skills must be (and are in RQ) shoe-horned into the same numerical range, so if a competent warrior can get by with 60% skill, so can a competent butcher or dancer. A warrior does not need to roll any combat skills to march in formation, form a shield wall, or put his sword in its sheath. When he goes into battle, however, he needs to make skill rolls because people are trying to kill him, and also making it as hard as they can for him to kill them. >If your skill is equal to the task level you must roll a standard success. >If your skill is less than the task level you must roll a special success So by increasing your skill from 59% to 60%, your chance of performing a Difficult task goes up from 12% to 60%? philip.hibbs@tnt.co.uk http://members.tripod.com/~PhilHibbs/ Any view of things that is not strange is false - Neil Gaiman, Sandman *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 13:44:06 +0100 From: "Hibbs, Philip" Subject: RE: [RQ-RULES] %-based Skill Difficulty >Why not reduce the base number for all skills, >but have that base number be the maximum >that you can gain from an experience roll? Or Base/5, and not bother changing the base? I don't like that idea of base % being from 1 to 6, that means that basically you have to figure in childhood and adolescent learning as well as occupational, and no skill can be used "at base". philip.hibbs@tnt.co.uk http://members.tripod.com/~PhilHibbs/ Any view of things that is not strange is false - Neil Gaiman, Sandman *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:14:52 -0400 From: "Bob Stancliff" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] BFRP skills rules > > Characteristics : Strength, Constitution, Size, Inteligence, Dexterity, > > Perception, Psyche, Appearance. These are rolled on 2D6+3. > > I assume that Psyche takes over for Mana level (annoyingly referred > to as Power in RQ3,which goes against my Physics training :-)? > > Also, a problem with 2D6+6 is that the range is now different from > that used in BRP, RQ, or D&D. This means lots of annoying conversions > for both old PCs and old expectations. Is there some way to get to the > now-lost extremes, or perhaps does this just affect the initial stat, > not species limits? Instead of Power and MP's, make it Mana and MP's... Essence and Psyche are vaguer. Normal human stats should probably be 3d6+1 but PC's should be '4d6 best 3' because most adventurers are the risk takers who are dissatisfied with the mundane life; they excel above their neighbors and have visions of greatness. Old stats convert with a simple +1 or just leave them as they are. Bob Stancliff (stanclif@ufl.edu) http://commnections.com/upgrades *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:19:49 -0400 From: "Bob Stancliff" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] category modifiers > > How about keeping the categories, but not claculating anything. You get > > +15% in one category, +10% in another, +5% in another, +0% in two and > > -5% in the last. You choose. > > This I really, really like. Even if it doesn't make BFRP, I'm snagging > it for my own house system! :) Great, now you can delete characteristics because they no longer have any use without category bonuses. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:25:03 -0400 From: "Bob Stancliff" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Skill difficulties > >I want to be able to sit down with people I don't know, generate > >characters from scratch in 30 minutes, including introducing them to > >the game background and outlining the rules of play, and start playing. > > So you're only going to play MGF, or BODGERS, or the Clangers roleplaying > game? I don't know of any commercial RPGs that have ever achieved that, and > even Hero Wars doesn't do it. Except "The Extraordinary Adventures of Baron > von Munchausen". I spend 30 minutes on the mythology, 30 more on the physical world, and at least 30 on characters. Bob Stancliff (stanclif@ufl.edu) http://commnections.com/upgrades *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:24:09 +0100 From: "Hibbs, Philip" Subject: RE: [RQ-RULES] BFRP skills rules >Normal human stats should probably be 3d6+1 Eh? +1? philip.hibbs@tnt.co.uk http://members.tripod.com/~PhilHibbs/ Any view of things that is not strange is false - Neil Gaiman, Sandman *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:30:47 -0400 From: "Bob Stancliff" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] BFRP Project Organization > >Your game rules will be very simple... "The referee will tell his story > >any way he sees fit, oh yeah, you can roll some dice if you want." > That puts off new referees, and young players. People like to buck the > system, and use rules and die-rolls to foil the GM's evil plots. Exactly, you are starting to over simplify. > >"Who needs all of those weapon boosting spells... > >Bladesharp and Fireblade is one too many". > > You know my opinion on that! Magic should be weird and strange, foreigners > (including "Orlanthi Foreigners", ie those from the next valley) should have > different, strange magics. Any argument that justifies new spells can be fitted to justify new skills. You can't have it both ways: either you simplify by dropping everything redundant and you make a baby game, or you keep most of the game intact but clean up the complex rules to apply them smoother. Bob Stancliff (stanclif@ufl.edu) http://commnections.com/upgrades *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ End of RuneQuest Rules Digest V1 #185 ************************************* *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. RuneQuest is a Trademark of Hasbro/Avalon Hill Games. With the exception of previously copyrighted material, unless specified otherwise all text in this digest is copyright by the author or authors, with rights granted to copy for personal use, to excerpt in reviews and replies, and to archive unchanged for electronic retrieval.