From: owner-runequest-rules@lists.imagiconline.com (RuneQuest Rules Digest) To: runequest-rules-digest@lists.imagiconline.com Subject: RuneQuest Rules Digest V3 #12 Reply-To: runequest-rules@lists.imagiconline.com Sender: owner-runequest-rules@lists.imagiconline.com Errors-To: owner-runequest-rules@lists.imagiconline.com Precedence: bulk RuneQuest Rules Digest Monday, January 17 2000 Volume 03 : Number 012 RuneQuest is a trademark of Hasbro/Avalon Hill Games. All Rights Reserved. TABLE OF CONTENTS Re: [RQ-RULES] Simplifying Success Levels Re: [RQ-RULES] Simplifying Success Levels Re: [RQ-RULES] Simplifying Success Levels Re: [RQ-RULES] Simplifying Success Levels Re: [RQ-RULES] Alternate Hit Locations Re: [RQ-RULES] Simplifying Success Levels RE: [RQ-RULES] Simplifying Success Levels [RQ-RULES] RE: [RQ Rulesbooks wanted [RQ-RULES] Opposed Skill Rolls Re: [RQ-RULES] Re: Divine Magic & the gods Re: [RQ-RULES] RE: [RQ Rulesbooks wanted Re: [RQ-RULES] Re: Divine Magic & the gods RE: [RQ-RULES] Re: Divine Magic & the gods 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: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 09:26:56 PST From: "Leon Kirshtein" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Simplifying Success Levels I think the standard way seems much simpler and easer. Special = 1/5th chance. Critical = 1/20th chance. Leon Kirshtein www.geocities.com/leonbk/ "No good deed shall go unpunished." ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 10:00:28 -0800 From: "Jarold Davis" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Simplifying Success Levels My players as well had a hard time with doing specials and criticals on the fly. A while back someone on the list suggested either the Harn or Rolemaster (can't remember which) system of specials, etc. This is what we've been using for a little while, and seems to work well so far. On a D100, for skill up to 100%, specials and criticals are as follows: Specials Criticals 5 10 15,20,25 30 35, 40, 45 50 55, 60, 65 70 75, 80, 85 90 95 99 is a special 100% + Fumbles are 99-00 for skills less than 100%, 00 for skills 100% or more (fumbles taken from Elric!). For skills 100% to 200%, additional percentiles are added to the special and critical chances. Example: Specials Criticals 1, 5, 6 10, 11 15, 16 20, 21 25, 26 30, 31 35, 36 40, 41, 45, 46 50, 51 55, 56, 60, 61 65, 66 70, 71 75, 76 80, 81 85, 86 90, 91 95, 96 It's pretty easy to memorize, and speeds combat up considerably. For any skill level, if it's equal or less than your skill, and the dice land one of the above, it's a special or critical. I've got it worked out through 300% skills - in case the party runs into gods or centuries old dwarves, maybe - but most uses are for 100% or less. __________________________________________ NetZero - Defenders of the Free World Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 10:03:07 -0800 From: "Jarold Davis" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Simplifying Success Levels Oh yea, the main reason I adopted the system for specials and criticals in my last post was because of temporary adds and minuses - fighting from disadvantage, Bladesharp, Fanaticism, etc., etc. There's a load of circumstances that alter attack and parry skill levels. JD __________________________________________ NetZero - Defenders of the Free World Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 16:30:31 -0500 From: Tal Meta Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Simplifying Success Levels I just opted to lose special successes, and make any roll beneath the skill that resulted in doubles (11, 22, 33, etc.) as a crit, and any roll exceeding the skill that resulted in doubles (88, 99, 00, etc.) a fumble. Obvious and neat. - -- talmeta@cybercomm.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine ICQ - 12594453 AIM - talmeta Homepage - *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 12:06:44 +0800 From: "Matthew Barron" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Alternate Hit Locations A request for obscure info here - In a long ago post someone suggested a conversion for hit locations to a Harnmaster type system. I liked this a lot but the post only provided humanoid locations. Does HM have a hit location chart(s) for non Humanoids and if so could someone tell me the percentile breakdowns? Matt B. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 01:55:15 EST From: SPerrin@aol.com Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Simplifying Success Levels In a message dated 1/16/2000 1:39:17 PM Pacific Standard Time, talmeta@cybercomm.net writes: << I just opted to lose special successes, and make any roll beneath the skill that resulted in doubles (11, 22, 33, etc.) as a crit, and any roll exceeding the skill that resulted in doubles (88, 99, 00, etc.) a fumble. Obvious and neat. >> The system I am using now also attempts neatness, though this one has a real elegant flair to it. However, I am using multiple successes and failures, so it wouldn't work for me. For those who haven't checked out my new rules, which are on Tal's website, I have success points at the simple success, half success, 1/10 success and 01 levels. Both sides roll, and if the attacker has one or more successes greater than the opponent, he hits. More than one success (called an extra success) means that he gets to pick a result from the special damage table. If he gets an 01 when the defender gets no success at all, he has three choices from the table, and the defender is usually dead. I actually have other modifications as well, such as position, so it is actually possible for the attacker to have five successes, or four successes in excess of what is needed to hit. I use that as a limit, no more successes are allowed, though more are possible. Steve Perrin *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 09:01:39 -0000 From: "Hibbs, Philip" Subject: RE: [RQ-RULES] Simplifying Success Levels >any roll exceeding the skill that resulted >in doubles (88, 99, 00, etc.) a fumble. That's what Warhammer uses, but not vice versa for criticals. Philip Hibbs http://www.snark.freeserve.co.uk/ 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. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 09:17:28 +0000 From: "PHELIM MURNION" Subject: [RQ-RULES] RE: [RQ Rulesbooks wanted I'm looking for old RQ2 stuff. Obviously I need to get my hands on the rulebook itself first. Anybody have one for sale? Phelim Murnion School of Business & Humanities Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology Dublin Road Galway phone: 353 91 753161 email: phelim.murnion@gmit.ie *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 18:34:58 +0800 From: GAZZA Subject: [RQ-RULES] Opposed Skill Rolls Firstly, to reply to Rich Allen, who had this comment about my success level simplification: > What I did was to add two more slots next to each skill on my > version of the RQ character sheet. Looks something like this: > > Skill % Sp Cr > ______________ ___ ___ ___ > ______________ ___ ___ ___ The problem with this is that it doesn't help you if there are modifiers to the roll. For example, a weapon skill used in conditions of complete darkness is at -75%; you're back to calculating the chances on the fly. My method escapes this calculation - when in doubt, let the dice do the math for you. Another feature of RQ (and BRP in general) is opposed skill rolls. For example, when you have one character using his Hide skill to hide from another using his Scan skill. In some cases, these circumstances can be easily resolved. If there's a clear "active" and "passive" skill, and if it's an "all or nothing" contest, then you can simply compare success levels with ties going to the passive contestant. In the above example, the Hider automatically stays hidden if he Criticals. If he Specials, then he's hidden unless the Scanner also Criticals. If he makes a Normal success, then he's hidden unless the scanner Specials. And if he fails, well, a normal success from the scanner is sufficient to spot him. But sometimes it's not as clear cut as that. Take the case of two merchants haggling over a price. The buyer might use his Bargain skill (from Gods of Glorantha), while the seller uses his Fast Talk to try to swindle the buyer. Assume the seller is the "passive" opponent; after all, the buyer initiated the contest. Clearly, if the seller gets a Critical success, that shouldn't mean he can totally rip off the buyer regardless of how successful he is. The simplest system in such a case is to reduce the victor's level of success by the loser's level of success. Thus, if the seller Criticals his Fast Talk but the buyer Specials his Bargain, then it is as if the Fast Talker made only a normal success. The problem here is that if ties go to the passive participant, he has a HUGE advantage. He should have SOME advantage, but not the staggering advantage he would actually have. Frex, say both buyer and seller have 80% skills. The chance that the seller wins this contest outright is about 27%, but it increases to 73% if he also is considered to win ties. (Now, in this particular example, one could easily rule that ties are simply rerolled - perhaps until one of the two succeeds or fumbles. But no doubt cases where a reroll is inappropriate could be envisaged). One simple way to resolve this would be to divide both skills by 5 and compare on the resistance table. But I dislike the resistance table; it's logarithmic nature (in this case, a skill of 5050% would always beat a skill of 5000%) is often inappropriate except at levels from 1-20. My solution is as follows: - - If one participant rolls a level of success at least 2 better than his opponent, he achieves a Critical Victory. - - If one participant rolls a level of success better than his opponent, he achieves a Victory. - - Otherwise, if both results are of the same level of success, then the participant who rolled the highest wins. If both rolls are equal, then the passive participant wins. Frex: In the above example, if the buyer Criticals and the seller gets only a normal success or worse, then the buyer has a Critical Victory (and, eg, gets the purchase at near-cost). If the seller Criticals and the buyer Specials, then the seller gets a Victory (and the purchase is at a reasonable profit - say 150% of cost). If the buyer rolls 34 and the seller rolls 23, then both have achieved normal success. In this case, the buyer wins, because he rolled higher (and so gets the purchase at a favourable discount - say, 120% of cost). In this way, you can add further levels. For example, you can rule that you must at least succeed in your roll to gain Victory (thus both participants could Fail or even Fumble, with neither being victorious over the other) or that a result that is a success, but not sufficient for Victory, can still be better than Failure (we'd call this level of success a Loss). You end up with, in descending order: Critical Victory, Victory, Loss, Failure, Fumble. This is similar to an unopposed roll (which has Critical, Special, Normal, Failure, and Fumble), and results can be arbitrated accordingly. For the interested, the above example (considering only the seller), this works out to a 6% chance of Critical Victory, a 42% chance of Victory, a 32% chance of Loss, a 19% chance of Failure, and a 1% chance of a Fumble. I've found that this system (which is inspired by Pendragon's resolution system) allows further options for setting "difficult tasks". Climbing up a sheer slope, for example, can be performed simply by requiring a roll at -50% (or more!), or by conducting an opposed roll against the slope's resistance of (say) 70%. A Critical Victory means that the climber has reached the summit, a Victory means he's halfway there, a Loss means he's a quarter of the way there, a Failure means he's grimly hanging on, and a Fumble... well... ;-) - -- GAZZA "To know others is wisdom. To know one's self is enlightenment." *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 10:50:50 PST From: "Leon Kirshtein" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Re: Divine Magic & the gods On magic which can hide chaos affinity. - -------------------------------------------------------------- Bob S. >True, but it is still a powerful spell, and can be extended if it's >temporal. Surely not long enough to pass an initiation ceremony. >I need to read the cult description again... aren't they permitted to lie their way into other cults, or was illumination required? Definitely need to be illuminated. >There is also some magic for hiding chaos ties under Kerjalk in Cults of >Terror. No. What they have is a Grant Chaos Gift spell which can be cast for a duration on someone who is not chaotic and afterward the person will not detect as chaotic (unlike the Lunar 'Chaos Gift' spell.) 'I would want to check Krarsht just to make sure, Nothing here I am afraid which will make you able to hide your chaotic affiliations >and of course, Lanbril, which is not chaos, has a spell to hide criminal >activity. This is an interesting one. I do not believe it will allow you to hide chaos features or membership in a chaos cult. In fact if I remember Lambril is part of the Orlanthi pantheon is strikes me as anti-chaotic himself, granted no where near the degree of other Orlanthi cults. Leon Kirshtein www.geocities.com/leonbk/ "No good deed shall go unpunished." ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 16:38:28 -0500 From: Joseph Elric Smith Servant to Arioch Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] RE: [RQ Rulesbooks wanted which copy are looking for I may have a runequest 2 book I can release, are you looking for the colour cover the monotone cover the stapled edition? or the bound edition? Ken P>S> I am looking for anothrer red book hard bound copy if any one has one they don't want anymore, god I love that book. PHELIM MURNION wrote: > I'm looking for old RQ2 stuff. Obviously I need to get my hands on > the rulebook itself first. Anybody have one for sale? > > Phelim Murnion > School of Business & Humanities > Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology > Dublin Road > Galway > > phone: 353 91 753161 > email: phelim.murnion@gmit.ie > > *************************************************************************** > To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com > with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 11:59:02 -0800 From: "Timothy Byrd" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Re: Divine Magic & the gods On hiding chaos: Isn't there a chaos gift that makes one undetectable as chaos? "Undetectable by magic" comes close. Maybe it would be a mutation of "harmless appearance". Of course I may be confusing RQ chaos and Warhammer RPG chaos. (Kinda off topic) Weirdly enough, I'm thinking that, over time, chaos in Glorantha became *worse* than chaos in the Old World (Warhammer universe). Perhaps it was just a lack of detail about chaos in the original RQ rules, but chaos didn't seem all that... well... *dirty*. The later Avalon Hill scenarios seemed to be written by people who'd been playing too much Call of Cthulu. In the published Warhammer scenarios there is at least one example of a major chaos gate being closed - I don't think there are any examples of being able to clean up a chaos infected area in Glorantha. - -- Tim *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2000 12:33:53 +1100 From: "Grawe, Philipp" Subject: RE: [RQ-RULES] Re: Divine Magic & the gods > of a major chaos gate being closed - I don't think there are any examples of > being able to clean up a chaos infected area in Glorantha. No, because under the Great Compromise, Chaos was accepted as part of the universe when Arachne Solara took Wakboth the Devil (and all the other Gods) and used him as part of the web of time (apologies if details are not exact, but you get my point). Chaos is here to stay, you can remove it, kill it, scrub at it, but it will always pop up somewhere. Philipp / Harry. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ End of RuneQuest Rules Digest V3 #12 ************************************ *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.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.