From: owner-runequest-rules@lists.ient.com (RuneQuest Rules Digest) To: runequest-rules-digest@lists.ient.com Subject: RuneQuest Rules Digest V4 #55 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 Saturday, May 19 2001 Volume 04 : Number 055 RuneQuest is a trademark of Hasbro/Avalon Hill Games. All Rights Reserved. TABLE OF CONTENTS [RQ-RULES] Combat principles Re: [RQ-RULES] set shield Re: [RQ-RULES] Re: Slave Bracelets RE: [RQ-RULES] set shield Re: [RQ-RULES] set shield [RQ-RULES] Losing limbs 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: Tue, 15 May 2001 13:41:05 +1000 From: "Jim Lawrie" Subject: [RQ-RULES] Combat principles > > I'm not sure if this is particularly relevant, but the new *in* SCA > > >shield style here in Oz is to hold it rather stationary and to dodge > around > >behind it. You move the shield to interpose it between your opponents > >position and yourself, and then leap, cavort and frolic away. The > shield is > >just there to get in the way of the opponents attacks, rather than > actively > >blocking with it. > > It depends on what kind of shield you are using. A targ HAS to be active > to be effective, the hopilite shield style I have used with a spear is > almost completely static. In the SCA we do not go for legs below the > knee, this changes fighting quite a bit. Also, shields for the SCA are > basically indestructible, a big advantage over real shields, but do not > catch weapons, which is an advantage and disadvantage for real shields- > depending in the kind of weapon stuck in the shield. I have heard a lot > of debate on how realistic/effective some of our sword blow styles would > be with a sword. This is a long way of saying that I don't think this is > one area that SCA combat is a good model for determination. > W. Kurt Wenz I agree there Kurt, although I debated the usefulness of a rap shot (this is to shoot past the body and swing it suddenly in from behind, for any nonSCA'ers) to my tutor a while back, and he showed me that he could sink a blade about 1/2 an inch into wood doing it in combat conditions. (I was impressed!) SCA is kinda funny, because it's mainly tourney conditions, not real combat (and I'm glad! I don't *want* to be kneed in the groin, then have a quillion slammed into my eye socket by my friends!). We tried a non-chivalric bout a little while back, but went kinda soft 'cos we were too worried about injuring each other. Suffice to say, it was even less realistic than normal SCA fighting. [For those out there who don't know what the hell we're talking about, the Society of Creative Anachronism is essentially a 'chivalric appreciation/historical society', and full contact fighting in armour is one of it's facets, although by no mean it's whole goal. It covers 600AD to 1600AD is more fun than I thought it could possibly be, but it is essential to stay away from the political infighting! I'm off to a feast this weekend, preceded by my first Tourney! I am scared silly.] I'll leave Steve Perrin to give us the details, but many of the combat concepts for RQ originated in SCA combat, but I'd say that SCA, medieval martial arts (as represented be the AEMMA and HACA groups for instance) have come a long way since RQ was first formulated, but most of the underlying principles still hold true. Except for SRs, and I don't like any way of making them easier yet! SCA combat does a reasonable effort at making small, skirmish type combat accurate within the safety constraints, and I think it's fairly good for RPing purposes. If anyone is interested in SCA, reenactment groups and the western european medieval martial arts groups, I'd be pleased to supply any info I can off list. Jim Lawrie *************************************************************************** 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, 15 May 2001 01:43:26 EDT From: SPerrin@aol.com Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] set shield - --part1_5a.15851e1e.28321bfe_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 5/14/2001 7:09:59 PM Pacific Daylight Time, jimpeta@iprimus.com.au writes: > I'm not sure if this is particularly relevant, but the new *in* SCA > shield style here in Oz is to hold it rather stationary and to dodge around > behind it. You move the shield to interpose it between your opponents > position and yourself, and then leap, cavort and frolic away. The shield is > just there to get in the way of the opponents attacks, rather than actively > blocking with it. > i know I'm getting right down to sub-nitpicking level, this is more a > trivia post than anything else! : ) > > Jim (who always wondered about the SCA, until Mr Perrin egged him into it) > > This is almost certainly not the list to be discussing this, but I find this form of shield work very strange indeed. When I was fighting, a very active shield was the hallmark of a good fighter. And I think only very large shields could be used to cover set areas in combat, probably in conjunction with a two-handed weapon and just hanging the shield on some part of the body. For instance, many figures have a two-handed weapon user carry a shield on his back, which could be useful for those surprise attacks... Steve Perrin, who is glad that Jim is interested in hacking in Oz - --part1_5a.15851e1e.28321bfe_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 5/14/2001 7:09:59 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
jimpeta@iprimus.com.au writes:


   I'm not sure if this is particularly relevant, but the new *in* SCA
shield style here in Oz is to hold it rather stationary and to dodge around
behind it. You move the shield to interpose it between your opponents
position and yourself, and then leap, cavort and frolic away. The shield is
just there to get in the way of the opponents attacks, rather than actively
blocking with it.
   i know I'm getting right down to sub-nitpicking level, this is more a
trivia post than anything else!  :  )

Jim (who always wondered about the SCA, until Mr Perrin egged him into it)



This is almost certainly not the list to be discussing this, but I find this
form of shield work very strange indeed. When I was fighting, a very active
shield was the hallmark of a good fighter.
And I think only very large shields could be used to cover set areas in
combat, probably in conjunction with a two-handed weapon and just hanging the
shield on some part of the body. For instance, many figures have a two-handed
weapon user carry a shield on his back, which could be useful for those
surprise attacks...

Steve Perrin, who is glad that Jim is interested in hacking in Oz - --part1_5a.15851e1e.28321bfe_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, 15 May 2001 01:58:39 -0700 From: Simon Hibbs Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Re: Slave Bracelets Bruce Probst : >*Current* info says that they come from Vormain (not Kralorela). I wouldn't be at all surprised. My info came from a conversation with Sandy Petersen a few years ago. He was speaking from memory and it's entirely possible he either conflated Vormain and Kralorela, or it may have changed since then. The longer Sandy and Greg are apart, the more their visions of Glorantha seem to diverge. However both of them are goign to be at Tentacles in Germany in a few weeks - I can't wait! Simon Hibbs *************************************************************************** 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, 15 May 2001 09:57:31 -0400 From: Robert Stancliff Subject: RE: [RQ-RULES] set shield That was quite a conversation last night. Now it's my turn. A set or slung shield only gets half it's AP because it is braced on the body instead of being cushioned by the arm muscles, which act as a shock absorber and deflect the force of the blow. The shield is being counted as body armor. This applies in all cases, whether slung on the back or front. What the rules failed to mention is that this only applies to the side of the body the shield is slung on. I am reasonably certain that this applies to '2 hand spear with shield' also, but if this was changed in the errata, as mentioned, then I can see that someone won the argument that with the left arm still behind the shield, it still counts to cushion the blow as a normal shield, at least for this particular fighting style. Any shield worn on the arm counts as static protection against all missiles. The shield will protect one to three adjacent areas, based on the size of the shield, and the locations are the stated choice of the wearer, with the arm always being one of them. This protection never applies to melee weapons because no shield completely covers the front and back of the arm, all the way to the shoulder... there is some exposed place that can still be hit by getting past the shield. A Parry critical blocks or diverts all damage and keeps the shield from being damaged. A parry special keeps the shield from being damaged, but excess damage still reaches the body. A normal Parry weakens the shield by 1 AP, as a nick or crease, and excess damage reaches the body. This represents the blow deflecting off the shield into the body, or the shield being driven back into the body to strike a location. Stancliff *************************************************************************** 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: Wed, 16 May 2001 14:30:50 +1000 From: Bruce Probst Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] set shield On Mon, 14 May 2001 20:06:35 +0000 (/etc/localtime), Brian Newman wrote: >> Yes, that's in RQ3. I disagree with it, but that's another matter (see >> other post). However, that still has nothing to do with bucklers being worn >> on the arm. > >Well, you're still wearing a big thick hunk of metal or wood on your >back. Would you say that it blocks absolutely nothing? What good is, >say, an upturned table in a bar fight then, if it doesn't block any >damage? You misunderstand me. I agree that a shield on the back blocks damage; I'm inclined to believe that it blocks *full* damage, not half. >I think that's what we did, and I was misremembering which was >which. :) It gave people a reason to *have* Arm Parry. Remember that if you parry with your arm you get 3 AP for "free". - ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au ICQ 6563830 Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "Nobody gets me. I'm the wind, baby." ASL FAQ http://users.senet.com.au/~mantis/ASLFAQ *************************************************************************** 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: Sat, 19 May 2001 23:51:24 EDT From: MurfNMurf@aol.com Subject: [RQ-RULES] Losing limbs - --part1_17.16068f95.2838993c_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi gang, Aside from an obvious reduction in Movement, what do you think would be the effects of a character missing a leg? Stats would be affected, but which ones? A friend uses a bit of mechanics in her RQ game, whereby a character is unable to use his full damage modifier if he's had his lower half incapacitated in combat, since he'd be unable to put his full force behind a strike. Would something like this be apropos with a missing leg? Any thoughts would be appreciated. Thanks. -Ken- - --part1_17.16068f95.2838993c_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit  Hi gang,
  Aside from an obvious reduction in Movement, what do you think would be
the effects of a character missing a leg?
  Stats would be affected, but which ones?
  A friend uses a bit of mechanics in her RQ game, whereby a character is
unable to use his full damage modifier if he's had his lower half
incapacitated in combat, since he'd be unable to put his full force behind a
strike. Would something like this be apropos with a missing leg?
  Any thoughts would be appreciated.
  Thanks.
 -Ken- - --part1_17.16068f95.2838993c_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. ------------------------------ End of RuneQuest Rules Digest V4 #55 ************************************ *************************************************************************** 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.