From: owner-runequest-rules@ (RuneQuest Rules Digest) To: runequest-rules-digest@lists.MPGN.COM Subject: RuneQuest Rules Digest V2 #73 Reply-To: runequest-rules@mpgn.com Sender: owner-runequest-rules@ Errors-To: owner-runequest-rules@ Precedence: bulk RuneQuest Rules Digest Thursday, April 22 1999 Volume 02 : Number 073 RuneQuest is a trademark of Hasbro/Avalon Hill Games. All Rights Reserved. TABLE OF CONTENTS [RQ-RULES] Re. Shamans & Fetches RE: [RQ-RULES] Re. Shamans & Fetches [RQ-RULES] Pedantic point [RQ-RULES] Mounted Combat Compromise Re: [RQ-RULES] Pedantic point RE: [RQ-RULES] Mounted Combat Compromise [RQ-RULES] Mounted Combat [RQ-RULES] RE: Double Bonus? Re: [RQ-RULES] Mounted Combat Compromise RE: [RQ-RULES] Mounted Combat Compromise Re: [RQ-RULES] Mounted Combat Compromise RE: [RQ-RULES] Mounted Combat Compromise [RQ-RULES] RQ/Glorantha auction update Re: [RQ-RULES] RQ/Glorantha auction update 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: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 14:10:50 +0100 From: simonh@msi-uk.com (Simon Hibbs) Subject: [RQ-RULES] Re. Shamans & Fetches Nikk Effingham : >>Blueface gets to modify his random encounter result by +/- 250, which >>on percentage dice is pretty good. > >But that doesn't alter the fact that when he actually encounters Bob, he's >only got 50/50 odds of winning. Worse still, what if Bob has max POW 21?!! Unfortunately I don't have Blueface's stats to hand, so I don't know what spells he has available. Remeber that a shaman on the spirit plane can still use his fetch's MPs to cast spells, but not to take hits in spirit combat. How much of a chance does Bob have of defeating Blueface after Blueface has cast 10 points of spirit screen, or three or four points of spirit block on himself? Another option for Blueface is simply to take a Ghost along and keep re-casting controll Ghost on it. He can afford the MPs. Simon Hibbs *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 14:16:53 +0100 From: "Hibbs, Philip" Subject: RE: [RQ-RULES] Re. Shamans & Fetches - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 >Another option for Blueface is simply to take a >Ghost along and keep re-casting controll Ghost >on it. He can afford the MPs. "Control" requires defeating the critter in spirit combat, so it's no use for much other than binding, learning names and spells, or chucking in your fetch. Opinions expressed may not even be my own, let alone those of any organisations, nations, species, or schools of thought to which I may be affiliated. http://www.snark.freeserve.co.uk/ Failure is not an option, it's integral to the o/s. - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPfreeware 6.0.2i iQA/AwUBNxsu4l1SBDU3jy39EQJK0wCeMH/bgkkE0uOAF+86f6loCum9rd0AnAoQ 9SnY5l1f9llRdnHex+E2mrbU =E9Fm - -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 09:31:10 -0400 (EDT) From: bjm10@cornell.edu Subject: [RQ-RULES] Pedantic point The plural of "shaman" is "shamans". The "-man" fragment of "shaman" is not at all related to the English word "man". PS: A female shaman is still called a shaman. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 14:42:42 +0100 From: simonh@msi-uk.com (Simon Hibbs) Subject: [RQ-RULES] Mounted Combat Compromise How about this for a compromise : 1. Mounted and unmounted combat skills with the same weapon are separate skills. 2. The first such skill learned is as normal for the wepaon skill of that kind. 3. The second such skill learned starts at a base of either the weapon base skill plus category modifier, or the half the charcater's chance with the alternate skill, whichever is higher. 4. Weapon skills when mounted are limited by the character's Ride skill. Velvus the Pelorian has a base Scimitar skill of 25% plus an attack modifier of +7%, giving a starting Scimitar skill of 32%. He gains another 50% skill while in the Lunar army, giving a total of 82%. Velvus is promoted to the rank of Tribune and gets himself a horse. Now Velvus has a base skill of 41% with Mounted Scimitar (half of 82%, which is higher than the 32% he would otherwise have). Unfortunately his Ride skill is only 25%. Although difficult at first, Velvus finds that as his Ride skill improves his ability with the Scimitar while mounted goes up quickly. Later, as his Ride skill increases to 35%, he finds that he has to practice mounted combat manoeuvres in order to improve his ability to fight effectively from horseback. Simon Hibbs *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 08:53:05 -0500 From: "Paul Stolar" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Pedantic point On a related note, I am reading G. Ashe's _dawn behind the Dawn_. he proposes that shamans were originally all female. Some of the evidence corraborates it. Shamans typically 'dressed' like women, even when they were men. Also, the words for female shamans are similar over wider range than the words for male shamans. This indicates that the female form is older and the male names are local. - -----Original Message----- From: bjm10@cornell.edu To: runequest-rules@mpgn.com Date: Monday, April 19, 1999 8:42 AM Subject: [RQ-RULES] Pedantic point > > >The plural of "shaman" is "shamans". The "-man" fragment of "shaman" is >not at all related to the English word "man". > >PS: A female shaman is still called a shaman. > > >*************************************************************************** >To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line >'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. > *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 17:12:07 -0500 From: "Rich Allen" Subject: RE: [RQ-RULES] Mounted Combat Compromise > 4. Weapon skills when mounted are limited by the character's Ride skill. Personally, I don't think this is right, and I'll explain why in a bit. First, though I want to say that I don't think adding more skills to RQ complicates the game in any way, and in fact, with a few of the people I game with, it actually SIMPLIFIES the game! Now, back to mounted combat. IMO, the ride skill should have nothing to do with combat. It should be used when a character wants to attempt to do something out of the ordinary while riding a horse, outside of combat. I say this, because I view someone with a high Ride skill as being equivalent to a modern equestrian rider; one that does the swift turns, jumps, etc. in a small arena. Or maybe a rodeo rider, but that is much more specialized. I honestly don't believe that a medieval knight could get on a horse and go through a series of complicated jumps and turns using his mounted combat skills only. So, considering the fact that I like the idea of adding skills to RQ, I don't see any problem at all in having separate skills for mounted and foot combat for each weapon. Leave the Ride skill for when a character tries to stay mounted while fleeing a band of Slarges through a freshly tilled (and fenced) field. It shouldn't penalize the character when it comes to mounted combat. This seems very elegant to me, and prevents arguments; if you have a skill stat right in front of you, it's hard to say you were cheated. This does, of course, requires some adjusting of the starting skills, but I feel the ones listed in the rules are too low anyway. Ah, but that's a different thread altogether! Rich Allen *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 09:44:17 +0100 From: Ashley Munday Subject: [RQ-RULES] Mounted Combat Just as a side thought, C&S has a seperate mounted combat skill with a prerequisite of riding that controls how well someone can fight from the saddle. If you nick this idea, you only have to add one skill and it enables us to play people that ride and fight, but not concurrently. Ash *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 09:56:04 -0400 From: "Loren Miller" Subject: [RQ-RULES] RE: Double Bonus? simonh@msi-uk.com (Simon Hibbs) sez: > I assume that the Bladesharp to hit bonus is because the weapon becomes > magicaly easy to use, seeeking out weaknesses in the opponent's defences. > Does the weapon become doubly easy to use when faced with two opponents? > I'd say not because then you're getting double the effect for no obvious > reason. I'd say yes because I believe the magic is on the weapon. When it comes to splitting attacks, I have a different flow chart than the following. > >> This is my system: > >> 1. Apply any multipliers to the skill > >> 2. Add any modifiers due to circumstances > >> 3. Apply any limiting factors, such as Ride skill > >> 4. Add any bonus or penalty due to magic > >> 5. If the chance is over 100, it may be split > >> 6. Roll it 1. apply any limiting factors, such as Ride skill 2. apply any multipliers to the skill 3. add any position based or other modifiers, including magical modifers from enchantments on the fighter (e.g. Strength) 4. if the chance is over 100 it may be split 5. add modifiers for the weapon itself, whether because of preternatural sharpness or magical dweomer 6. roll em - -- +++++++++++++++++++++++23 Loren Miller "If men cease to believe that they will one day become gods then they will surely become worms." --Henry Miller, _The Colossus of Maroussi_ *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 18:31:49 +0100 From: "Dom Twist" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Mounted Combat Compromise > Now, back to mounted combat. IMO, the ride skill should have nothing to do >with combat. I disagree with this totaly. Your ability to control the movements of your mount would be as critical as footwork in a ground fight. Where do you think those equestrian skills were developed from? They've always been about combat. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 19:27:42 -0500 From: "Rich Allen" Subject: RE: [RQ-RULES] Mounted Combat Compromise > I disagree with this totaly. Your ability to control the movements of your > mount would be as critical as footwork in a ground fight. > Where do you think those equestrian skills were developed from? They've > always been about combat. You missed my point. I agree that the ability to control your horse is critical to mounted combat, I just think that controlling your mount during combat is a separate skill category from controlling your mount outside of combat. Rich Allen *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 18:28:13 +0100 From: "Dom Twist" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Mounted Combat Compromise > You missed my point. I agree that the ability to control your horse is >critical to mounted combat, I just think that controlling your mount during >combat is a separate skill category from controlling your mount outside of >combat. I see what you mean. But I still disagree. Things like 'polo bending' and dressage are 'pure horsemanship' but were orignally intended as combat practise. You could argue the point for skills like 'Jumping' and so on...but really you'd have to break the ride skill down into component peices. By the same measure you'd have to break the combat skills down beyond simple attack and parry. I try to avoid having many many skills IMG. Mounted Combat ability will obviously be limited by Horsemanship (or Bisonwomanship or whatever) and the simplest way of doing that is the ride skill limit. Most Nomad Pc's will start the game with high ride anyway and if they geta skill check for ride from a mounted combat it'll stay that way. Characters who arnt Nomads or professional Cavalry SHOULD be next to useless fighting from horseback anyway. DomT *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 16:23:23 -0500 From: "Rich Allen" Subject: RE: [RQ-RULES] Mounted Combat Compromise > I see what you mean. But I still disagree. Things like 'polo bending' and > dressage are 'pure horsemanship' but were orignally intended as combat > practise. But then you could say that Dancing and Orating should be the same skill, since originally (and even today in some parts of the world) dancing was how people communicated and passed down stories and legends. In my gaming group, more detail is better, and adding skills to RQ is encouraged (see page 79 of the Players Book). Other groups may be the opposite; neither style is wrong, in my opinion. Use whatever works for you, that's my opinion! Rich Allen *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 21:10:23 +1000 From: arkat@telstra.easymail.com.au Subject: [RQ-RULES] RQ/Glorantha auction update Hello I figured I'd better post this at least once on the Rules Digest Also anyone with a spare copy of Borderlands or Big Rubble and wants to swap? I'll consider bargaining. (Yeh I know, but worth a try!) :) First amount is suggested min. bid (Any sensible offers will now be considered) 2nd amount (with initials) is current best bid Troll Gods #12 Gods of Glorantha #15 Griffin Island #10 Genertela: CotHW #15 (BW #25) Going x 2 Sun County #7 Apple Lane (old yellow cover version) #4 Haunted Ruins #5 River of Cradles #7 Duck Tower #9 (AN #12) Daughters of Darkness #1 (#1 MM) Going x1 Scorpion Hall (AN #10) Rules of the Road: Please Bid in UK# When considering postage, all items except DT, RoC, SH and AL are in the UK, (these 4 in Oz) 1) I reserve the right to withdraw items if bids are seriously disappointing 2) If you'd like bid annonymity, please ask 3) I'll post updates on the glorantha digest 4) No items are in crappy condition, all are good if a little worn. If you don't want signs of useage don't bid high 5) Postage to be paid by the buyer negotiated when final bid accepted 6) Auction hopefully to be over by the end of April 7) Any questions, here I am :) *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 10:32:57 -0400 From: "Bob Stancliff" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] RQ/Glorantha auction update > Hello > I figured I'd better post this at least once on the Rules Digest > 7) Any questions, here I am :) Repost with your name and e-mail address. Bob *************************************************************************** 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 V2 #73 ************************************ *************************************************************************** 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.