From: owner-runequest-rules@lists.ient.com (RuneQuest Rules Digest) To: runequest-rules-digest@lists.ient.com Subject: RuneQuest Rules Digest V3 #111 Reply-To: runequest-rules@lists.ient.com Sender: owner-runequest-rules@lists.ient.com Errors-To: owner-runequest-rules@lists.ient.com Precedence: bulk RuneQuest Rules Digest Monday, November 13 2000 Volume 03 : Number 111 RuneQuest is a trademark of Hasbro/Avalon Hill Games. All Rights Reserved. TABLE OF CONTENTS [RQ-RULES] Bows and D&D [RQ-RULES] Bows and D&D Re: [RQ-RULES] Bows and D&D Re: [RQ-RULES] Arrows Re: [RQ-RULES] Arrows Re: [RQ-RULES] Arrows Re: [RQ-RULES] Bows n' Stuff RE: [RQ-RULES] Arrows 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, 13 Nov 2000 11:18:55 -0000 From: "Tom Zunder" Subject: [RQ-RULES] Bows and D&D Bows: Of course there isn't a standard bow, in real life not only did different cultures design different size and shapes of bows with different strings, but often a bow would be tailored to the size and strength of an individual archer. The rating of bows by their 'pull' is probably very accurate and very typical of Aftermath. I do like adding half the 'db' to bow's damage, although by setting the minimum strength you could say that it is factored in. Since an English longbow was a seriously fatal weapon even to a knight in full plate, I do think that a bow requiring high strength but delivering serious and consistent damage should be added, say min STR 15 and 2d8+2 damage? Comments? Of course what I'm saying is you can add any type of bow you like. D&D The bits about converting D&D to BRP that I enjoy are monsters. I couldn't give two figs about the people, they're just stats, but monsters can be fun. D&D ones are so lethal and silly, but with some thought they can be made into sensible, fantastical and enjoyable opponents. I remember the conversion EE Simablist did of a D&D creature into C&S, now what was it, some beetle like monster that burrowed.. Anyone remember accurately? - --- Tom Zunder tomz@writeme.com ICQ: 1521799 http://www.elric.org.uk *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 11:18:55 -0000 From: "Tom Zunder" Subject: [RQ-RULES] Bows and D&D Bows: Of course there isn't a standard bow, in real life not only did different cultures design different size and shapes of bows with different strings, but often a bow would be tailored to the size and strength of an individual archer. The rating of bows by their 'pull' is probably very accurate and very typical of Aftermath. I do like adding half the 'db' to bow's damage, although by setting the minimum strength you could say that it is factored in. Since an English longbow was a seriously fatal weapon even to a knight in full plate, I do think that a bow requiring high strength but delivering serious and consistent damage should be added, say min STR 15 and 2d8+2 damage? Comments? Of course what I'm saying is you can add any type of bow you like. D&D The bits about converting D&D to BRP that I enjoy are monsters. I couldn't give two figs about the people, they're just stats, but monsters can be fun. D&D ones are so lethal and silly, but with some thought they can be made into sensible, fantastical and enjoyable opponents. I remember the conversion EE Simablist did of a D&D creature into C&S, now what was it, some beetle like monster that burrowed.. Anyone remember accurately? - --- Tom Zunder tomz@writeme.com ICQ: 1521799 http://www.elric.org.uk *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 11:20:13 -0700 From: "Stephen Posey [TurboPower Software]" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Bows and D&D Tom Zunder wrote: > > Bows: > > Of course there isn't a standard bow, in real life not only did > different cultures design different size and shapes of bows > with different strings, but often a bow would be tailored to > the size and strength of an individual archer. Not until modern times anyway, nor did you get the "compound" bow (at least on "real" planet Earth), though the pulley technology was there some time previous so someone COULD have created one if they'd thought of it. > The rating of bows by their 'pull' is probably very accurate and > very typical of Aftermath. > > I do like adding half the 'db' to bow's damage, although by setting > the minimum strength you could say that it is factored in. Since > an English longbow was a seriously fatal weapon even to a knight > in full plate, I do think that a bow requiring high strength but delivering > serious and consistent damage should be added, say min STR 15 > and 2d8+2 damage? Comments? Seems to me that arrow type may play some role here too. I suspect the longbow arrows were designed with armor piercing in mind. Perhaps properly designed arrows ignore or halve armor defense? Impale on critical? > Of course what I'm saying is you can add any type of bow you like. > > D&D > > The bits about converting D&D to BRP that I enjoy are monsters. I couldn't > give two figs about the people, they're just stats, but monsters can be fun. > D&D ones are so lethal and silly, but with some thought they can be made > into sensible, fantastical and enjoyable opponents. I remember the > conversion EE Simablist did of a D&D creature into C&S, now what was it, some > beetle like monster that burrowed.. Anyone remember accurately? The Umber Hulk in the _C&S SourceBook I_. Very good article on how to "have your cake and eat it too" with your favorite D&D Critters. ;-) Stephen Posey slposey@concentric.net *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 13:41:32 EST From: SPerrin@aol.com Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Arrows - --part1_13.d61bb08.27418fdc_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 11/13/00 10:30:48 AM Pacific Standard Time, StephenP@turbopower.com writes: > Seems to me that arrow type may play some role here too. I suspect the > longbow > arrows were designed with armor piercing in mind. Perhaps properly designed > arrows ignore or halve armor defense? Impale on critical? > > Essentially there are two arrow points, the broad point and the bodkin point. The broad point (Maybe called broadleaf point?) is used for hunting and has a relatively wide cross section, which makes a bigger wound. Against armor, however, it bounces. If you are fighting armored or thick skinned opponents you want the bodkin point, which has a narrow cross section and punches through armor, much as modern armor-piercing ammunition does. For the same reason, it usually does less damage against an unarmored foe. If you really want to get down to the minutiae of differentiating them, give the broad point an extra +1 of damage or let the bodkin point negate a point or two of armor. Steve Perrin, who debated making the distinction in at least two editions of RQ - --part1_13.d61bb08.27418fdc_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 11/13/00 10:30:48 AM Pacific Standard Time,
StephenP@turbopower.com writes:


Seems to me that arrow type may play some role here too.  I suspect the
longbow
arrows were designed with armor piercing in mind.  Perhaps properly designed
arrows ignore or halve armor defense?  Impale on critical?



Essentially there are two arrow points, the broad point and the bodkin point.
The broad point (Maybe called broadleaf point?) is used for hunting and has a
relatively wide cross section, which makes a bigger wound. Against armor,
however, it bounces. If you are fighting armored or thick skinned opponents
you want the bodkin point, which has a narrow cross section and punches
through armor, much as modern armor-piercing ammunition does. For the same
reason, it usually does less damage against an unarmored foe.

If you really want to get down to the minutiae of differentiating them, give
the broad point an extra +1 of damage or let the bodkin point negate a point
or two of armor.

Steve Perrin, who debated making the distinction in at least two editions of
RQ - --part1_13.d61bb08.27418fdc_boundary-- *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 12:05:54 -0700 From: "Stephen Posey [TurboPower Software]" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Arrows > In a message dated 11/13/00 10:30:48 AM Pacific Standard Time, > StephenP@turbopower.com writes: > > Seems to me that arrow type may play some role here too. I suspect the > longbow > arrows were designed with armor piercing in mind. Perhaps properly designed > arrows ignore or halve armor defense? Impale on critical? > > Essentially there are two arrow points, the broad point and the bodkin point. > The broad point (Maybe called broadleaf point?) is used for hunting and has a > relatively wide cross section, which makes a bigger wound. Against armor, > however, it bounces. If you are fighting armored or thick skinned opponents > you want the bodkin point, which has a narrow cross section and punches > through armor, much as modern armor-piercing ammunition does. For the same > reason, it usually does less damage against an unarmored foe. Both Aftermath! and Bushido (the archery rules from which I've been gnawing upon over the last week or so with an eye towards coming up with some kind of BRP/RQ port), both include various arrow tip types with associated modifiers, armor-piercing being one kind. > If you really want to get down to the minutiae of differentiating them, give > the broad point an extra +1 of damage or let the bodkin point negate a point > or two of armor. Sounds reasonable to me. Any reason to suppose one kind is more expensive, harder to make, or any other differentiating factors? The other games in question do make a point of saying that arrows made for one kind of bow are generally not usable with another. > Steve Perrin, who debated making the distinction in at least two editions of > RQ Any thoughts on the rather broad range of damage dice for Bows listed by the various BRP based rules sets that were posted last week? Stephen Posey slposey@concentric.net *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 15:16:01 EST From: MurfNMurf@aol.com Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Arrows - --part1_12.4c9a171.2741a601_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 11/13/00 12:52:43 PM Central Standard Time, Steve wonders on different types of arrows: > Essentially there are two arrow points, the broad point and the bodkin > point.[snip] > Well, I remember seeing a documentary several years back on this very subject. A couple of different arrowheads were mentioned. Instead of being pointed, one of the arrowheads had a wide, D-shaped head, with the curve of the D essentially being the "point." Anyhow, this bladed arrowhead was able to pierce the thinner plate used on the limbs at several hundred (don't have my notes anymore for the exact range, however) yards. Another arrowhead was long and pointed, like the bodkin head Steve was talking about, except it was made a little differently, with the point driven through a hollow metal ball until the point stuck out of it. This arrowhead was made to fire at a target's helmet. When it hit a helmet, the point would penetrate it, and the ball would slam against the helmet; inflicting a horrific dent, which would also damage the wearer. It could pierce the thicker body and helmet plates. -Ken- - --part1_12.4c9a171.2741a601_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 11/13/00 12:52:43 PM Central Standard Time, Steve wonders
on different types of arrows:


Essentially there are two arrow points, the broad point and the bodkin
point.[snip]



  Well, I remember seeing a documentary several years back on this very
subject. A couple of different arrowheads were mentioned.
  Instead of being pointed, one of the arrowheads had a wide, D-shaped head,
with the curve of the D essentially being the "point." Anyhow, this bladed
arrowhead was able to pierce the thinner plate used on the limbs at several
hundred (don't have my notes anymore for the exact range, however) yards.
  Another arrowhead was long and pointed, like the bodkin head Steve was
talking about, except it was made a little differently, with the point driven
through a hollow metal ball until the point stuck out of it. This arrowhead
was made to fire at a target's helmet. When it hit a helmet, the point would
penetrate it, and the ball would slam against the helmet; inflicting a
horrific dent, which would also damage the wearer. It could pierce the
thicker body and helmet plates.
 -Ken-
  
- --part1_12.4c9a171.2741a601_boundary-- *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 07:57:00 +1100 From: "Jim & Peta Lawrie" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Bows n' Stuff Of course there isn't a standard bow, in real life not only did different cultures design different size and shapes of bows with different strings, but often a bow would be tailored to the size and strength of an individual archer. The rating of bows by their 'pull' is probably very accurate and very typical of Aftermath. I do like adding half the 'db' to bow's damage, although by setting the minimum strength you could say that it is factored in. Since an English longbow was a seriously fatal weapon even to a knight in full plate, I do think that a bow requiring high strength but delivering serious and consistent damage should be added, say min STR 15 and 2d8+2 damage? Comments? By Agincourt, the bow was more harmful to the horses they rode, but if you're an idiot and let them fire point blank through a hedge it's going to skewer you. Chainmaille is a good protection against arrows at extreme range, but bodkins at moderate and short range pass through with ease. There was no real defense against javelins until plate appeared, or dodging which was considered rather easy, if you had the room to do so. Evidently a limewood kite shield 'caught' arrows well, but javelins smashed through and through your maille as well, a scary thought. The Saracen archers who decimated the early crusades evidently had a hard time getting their light arrows though quilted armour *over* crossbowman's maille, the quilt slowed down the arrow and the maille stopped it, eyewitness reports have crossbowmen trudging along with up to five arrows sticking out of their quilt unconcerned. (That armour must have stunk in the climate!) We're a bit enamoured by the Welsh longbow in the English speaking world, and rightly so as it was a fine weapon, but it was done without across the rest of the feudal landscape and by it's enemies. Plague was a terrible blow against it, the precious base of culturally trained bowmen disappeared and then couldn't be spared for war. The Europeans preferred the crossbow, because *handled intelligently* it was a nightmare weapon, capable of slamming into anything up to white plate. Crossbowmen knew their limitations though, and played towards them. In a siege it was a fool who gave a crossbowman a shot at him, behind their defences they couldn't be overrun while loading and they had a better field of fire behind the arrow slits than a bow had. The afore mentioned crusader crossbowmen from Italy and a peculiar form of Freeman from Germany worked in tandem with a dismounted man-at-arms armed with spear, sword and shield. He gave the crossbowman cover behind his shield while he reloaded and protected him from quick sallies by the Muslim horse, and the crossbowman made it perilous for the enemy to try and close. A good combo for RQ players (although our morale is generally superb anyway!) The Byzantine's preferred their awesome Laminated Bows, almost as powerful as a longbow in the scheme of things and capable of being used from horseback. The Byzantine horse mounted army kept their empire independent for an awfully long time against a concerted foe, it wasn't until their 'allies' sacked the city that their death knell sounded (thanks to the Venetians in an appalling short sighted scheme) Jim *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 14:08:25 -0700 From: "Rich Allen" Subject: RE: [RQ-RULES] Arrows > > If you really want to get down to the minutiae of > differentiating them, give > > the broad point an extra +1 of damage or let the bodkin point > negate a point > > or two of armor. I'd take the later option; arrow heads meant to penetrate armor should subtract a point of AP from the target. > Sounds reasonable to me. Any reason to suppose one kind is more > expensive, > harder to make, or any other differentiating factors? The other games in > question do make a point of saying that arrows made for one kind > of bow are > generally not usable with another. I'm not sure one type should be any harder to produce than the other, especially since there are many ways of producing each type. Molds, drawing or pounding, etc. I can't see how the arrow head would determine which type of bow that arrow could be used with though. As long as the arrow head is beyond the arrow rest at full draw, any kind of arrow head can be used on arrows shot from that bow. So, arrow head determines whether or not some AP can be ignored, and bow strength has the possibility of adding to the damage of all arrows? Sounds good to me! Oh, and we also play with a house rule that determines impales based on the amount of damage done. If an arrow deals physical damage equal to one half of that locations hp's or more, it impales that location. So, an arm with 4 hp and 3 APs is hit by an arrow that does 5 damage, the arrow is stuck in that arm (and obviously has put a hole in the armor). Rich Allen *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ End of RuneQuest Rules Digest V3 #111 ************************************* *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.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.