From: owner-runequest-rules@ (RuneQuest Rules Digest) To: runequest-rules-digest@lists.MPGN.COM Subject: RuneQuest Rules Digest V1 #153 Reply-To: runequest-rules@mpgn.com Sender: owner-runequest-rules@ Errors-To: owner-runequest-rules@ Precedence: bulk RuneQuest Rules Digest Thursday, September 10 1998 Volume 01 : Number 153 RuneQuest is a trademark of Avalon Hill Games. All Rights Reserved. TABLE OF CONTENTS Re: [RQ-RULES] New spell Re: [RQ-RULES] New spell [RQ-RULES] Woundart [RQ-RULES] Wounddart as Variable [RQ-RULES] New Spell Fullthrow [RQ-RULES] Fwd: RE: the REFLEX rule RE: [RQ-RULES] Fwd: RE: the REFLEX rule [RQ-RULES] Woundart 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: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 09:13:15 PDT From: "Leon Kirshtein" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] New spell >> An elf in our campaign seems to roll a lot of impales >>with her bow, making it deadly enough without magic. > Several of my characters are almost impale immune with armor + >protection > 14AP. A common statement from the toughest players is >"don't bother rolling damage unless you have a crit". There needs to be >an equalizer for arrows, after all, they were decisive at places like >Agincourt. Acid Arrow 2pt This spell is cast on a missle of some type. The missle's substance is change into acid with POT = base damage of the missle (exp. comp bow arrow 1d8+1, thrown dagger 1d4, etc) The acid is capable of damaging physical armor, but becomes inactive after the intial hit. The acid missle does not impale, but a special will do maximum damage for the missle. This is optional: A critical hit will burn through the magical protection and reducing it by 1 for each point of damage as well as doing damage to the target. >RU>And call me a killjoy, but many weapon enhancing Spirit spells are >RU>now unavailable (i.e. Bladesharp) because they seemed to make >RU>the game a bit boring. > Wow, you ARE a killjoy. I can see making all of the damage spells >more expensive to reduce weapon inflation, but dropping them from the >game is steep. You might as well drop all magic from the game on the same basis. >I can seriously see making spirit magic incompatible >with divine magic or sorcery to stop the use of multiple sources of >damage enhancement, but how can you say that Bladesharp is boring? The >increased risk of severed limbs can curdle the blood of any player. Ahhhhh, yes spurt, spurt, spurt ... Leon Kirshtein ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com *************************************************************************** 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, 10 Sep 1998 09:17:53 PDT From: "Leon Kirshtein" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] New spell >> An elf in our campaign seems to roll a lot of impales >>with her bow, making it deadly enough without magic. > Several of my characters are almost impale immune with armor + >protection > 14AP. A common statement from the toughest players is >"don't bother rolling damage unless you have a crit". There needs to be >an equalizer for arrows, after all, they were decisive at places like >Agincourt. Acid Arrow 2pt This spell is cast on a missle of some type. The missle's substance is change into acid with POT = base damage of the missle (exp. comp bow arrow 1d8+1, thrown dagger 1d4, etc) The acid is capable of damaging physical armor, but becomes inactive after the intial hit. The acid missle does not impale, but a special will do maximum damage for the missle. This is optional: A critical hit will burn through the magical protection and reducing it by 1 for each point of damage as well as doing damage to the target. >RU>And call me a killjoy, but many weapon enhancing Spirit spells are >RU>now unavailable (i.e. Bladesharp) because they seemed to make >RU>the game a bit boring. > Wow, you ARE a killjoy. I can see making all of the damage spells >more expensive to reduce weapon inflation, but dropping them from the >game is steep. You might as well drop all magic from the game on the same basis. >I can seriously see making spirit magic incompatible >with divine magic or sorcery to stop the use of multiple sources of >damage enhancement, but how can you say that Bladesharp is boring? The >increased risk of severed limbs can curdle the blood of any player. Ahhhhh, yes spurt, spurt, spurt ... Leon Kirshtein ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com *************************************************************************** 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, 10 Sep 1998 17:45:32 +0000 From: "Simon Phipp" Subject: [RQ-RULES] Woundart Brad Furst: > Is this a differnce between Chaosium and Avalon Hill? Is this a > difference between Glorantha and non-Glorantha? I remember that > some specific stackings were once upon a time ruled no-no, but with > the advent of the AH:RQ3:errata and the publication of such > precedents as _Dorastor_ (if not sooner), combining Protection with > Countermagic became commonplace. Is it inherently necessary to rule > against stacking? I can quickly concede to not mix "Woundart" with > Firearrow, since the latter may be described as elementally changing > the arrow from vegetable/mineral into fire. Why not combine with > Multimissile? Its limitations are already built into the extra > missiles which cannot Impale. Do you allow Fireblade and Bladesharp to stack together (to do 3D6 + 1D4 + 4, for instance)? If so, you should allow Woundart and FireArrow to stack. Similarly, if you alow FireArrow and Speedart to stack then so should Woundart and Speedart. Multimissile is just too deadly if allowed to stack with spells such as FireArrow/Speedart/Woundart as it destroys even medium-armoured people (even if only the first arrow is affected). For high level characters, give them sorcery or Lunar Manipulates and watch the armour turn to butter. Regarding the comparison with Agincourt, they used longbows (1D10 + 1 damage). If you allow missile bonus to be added to strengthened bows (which I do) then they do 1D10 + 1 + 1D4, an average of 9 on a normal hit or 20 on an impale. A normal hit would therefore penetrate normal armour, on average, an impale would destroy a location. With the absence of healing this becomes devastating. Now, add magic and we add 3 points for a Speedart, nearly breaking a limb on average. If we add Multimissile we do damage to each location struck - a good Multimissile will knock a medium-armoured person down (7 AP and 13 HP would only need 7 missiles to hit to kill him). > Why do hand held weapons have a precedent for graduated augmentation > (Bladesharp 1/2/3/4/5/6/7/8), but missiles have one and only one > level of augmentation? > > Bob Stancliff (Stancliff@commnections.com) > >A more interesting choice might be to make Speedart +2 and +10% and > >Variable. > Richard Ohlson responded: > >Remember, you REALLY don't want your PC's getting a critical impale > > with an arrow that could potentially do 3d6 +1d8 damage. That > >would be what, 52 points of damage, ignoring armor, correct? > > _Firearrow_ does not Impale in RQ3, so a critical would be (2d8 + 2) > + (my proposed +1d8). But, a bad rule is a bad rule. FireArrow always impaled in RQ2 and should still impale, a composite bow doing 3D6 + 9 for an impale, adding 1D8 if Woundart stacks, an average of 24 rather than 19.5, a small change you might think. However, a critical hit does maximum damage - 18 for a FireArrow, 26 for a Woundart/FireArrow. A critical impale would do an extra 9 damage and would take any normal person down. > So what difference whether 26 points of > damage or 52 points of damage unless the target has [so many] AP? In my view, not a jot - I allow all kinds of rules to increase damage, which most of the Digesters would probably hate. But you have to be consistent - either all spells stack or none do IMO. Leon Kirshten: > >The actual intention within the campaign research was to combine > >this > with > >Speedart, in order to allow an archer to avoid the futility of > >fighting armored knights. > > A better way of doing this would be to give the spell ability to > penetrate armor, something like that of firearms in COC. How about > 2d6 armor penetration factor against armor (not Protection or > Shield) for the spell, but no additional damage. In this case an > arrow will still do 1d8+1 but will ignor on the average most phycal > armor. You must have loads of time on your hands as a GM if you work these things out. I hate this kind of rule - too complex and too slow. Regarding high level damage, you have to see a god missile weapon used in order to appreciate the havoc it can cause. Imagine a thrown rock doing 1D4 + DB. A Great Troll with Strength can easily get a 5D6 damage bonus doing 1D4 + 5D3 damage. Stack this with a high attack chance (200%, say) and you Critical 10% of the time. Use a good/enhanced multimissile (Multimissile 10, for instance, although with Lunar manipulates and a good start spell you can get 20) and you get someone doing an average of 12 on a normal hit but 10 or 20 times with 2 criticals a round doing 19 each. Pump up the attack chance and this becomes even more devastating. Use magical rocks doing extra damage (even lead rocks do 1D4 + 2) and this is unstoppable fairly quickly. Similarly, an elf at 200% with Arrow Trance and Multimissile gets a large number of attacks at 400%, a 20% critical chance which is well worth the effort. See Ya Simon Phipp *************************************************************************** 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, 10 Sep 1998 09:09:48 -0700 From: "Jim Bickmeyer" Subject: [RQ-RULES] Wounddart as Variable I think that the Wounddart spell has some merit. It is a little to strong for me as it was presented. I would make it a variable spell. Maybe something like this. 1pt = 1D3 2pt = 1D4 3pt = 1D5 4pt = 1D6 5pt = 1D8 6pt = 1D10 ...... And so on. I would only allow Wounddart to be stacked with Multimissle to effect the real arrow only. I would consider allowing it to stack with Speeddart, but it would negate the +3 damage, leave the +15% to hit. Where in the Rules does it state that Multimissle and Speeddart may not be stacked? As I recall Speeddart is Temporal, thus it can be cast up to 25 melee round prior to use. Why not add Multimissle to it? The Speeddart would only add +15% to hit and +3 damage to the real arrow. Free web-based email, Forever, From anywhere! http://www.mailexcite.com *************************************************************************** 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, 10 Sep 1998 09:16:04 -0700 From: "Jim Bickmeyer" Subject: [RQ-RULES] New Spell Fullthrow All this talk of a new missile spell got me thinking of one that has rattled around in the back of my mind. Now that I have typed it out, I am planning to introduce this as a new spell in my campaign. It is intended to help with thrown missile weapons. I would like to get some feedback on this spell, as well as some other names for it. I’m not all that happy with the name I have. FULLTHROW Variable Touch, Temporal This spell will increase the spell recipient’s thrown weapon damage bonus up to their full damage bonus. It can not increase the recipient’s damage bonus to more than it was at the time of Fullthrow was cast. If the damage bonus is increased after Fullthrow is cast, then Fullthrow must be recast at a greater level to gain the increased damage bonus. Otherwise the level of Fullthrow was cast for is continued to be applied, or 1/2 the damage bonus, whichever is greater. Fullthrow may only be used with thrown weapon that receive the 1/2 damage bonus to the throw. For every point of the spell, the maximum range of the weapon is increased by 5%. The spell can only be cast on living beings, and only effects their weapon damage bonus for thrown weapons. It may not be cast on weapons themselves. Spells that effect the weapons or the missiles themselves do not interfere with Fullthrow. 1 point provides 1D4 2 points 1D6 3 points 1D6 + 1D3 4 points 2D6 5 points 2D6 + 1D3 and so on. Spell availability. It is available to primitive cultures that do not have Bow technology. I also think it would be a Spirit Cult spell. One that is worshipped by peltast troops. I have not come up with the Spirit Cult yet. I would be willing to some input on this as well. Free web-based email, Forever, From anywhere! http://www.mailexcite.com *************************************************************************** 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, 10 Sep 1998 14:39:26 -0400 From: Tal Meta Subject: [RQ-RULES] Fwd: RE: the REFLEX rule From: "Ian Thomson" Subject: RE: the REFLEX rule Me: > >Example 4 above also gives players the chance to > >negate that annoying Storyteller narrative, when they say "the door > >has shut" and there's nothing you can do, even if you were right next > >to it! Phil Hibbs: > That's a good arguement against the skill! > Yes, its interesting different styles of playing/running stuff, it always amazes me, people have such different expectations etc I ran a session the other night, and my partner asked me what i liked about it, and I told her one thing was when players did unexpected things, disrupted the plot thru good playing or unexpected good luck. I like to give the PCs scope for heroic action and run the system more like a heroic novel than a nitty gritty everyone is equal, (PCs and farmboys) and I understand some people don't run like this perhaps I read too many heroic fantasy novels as a kid, where the heroes don't always succeed, but I like to give them the edge to succeed as special individuals (eg conan, farhrd and the grey mouser) and quite legitimately, you may not :) *************************************************************************** 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, 10 Sep 1998 19:55:29 +0100 From: "Hibbs, Philip" Subject: RE: [RQ-RULES] Fwd: RE: the REFLEX rule >>>Example 4 above also gives players the chance to >>>negate that annoying Storyteller narrative, when they say "the door >>>has shut" and there's nothing you can do, even if you were right next >>>to it! >>That's a good arguement against the skill! >I like to give the PCs scope for heroic action and run the >system more like a heroic novel than a nitty gritty >everyone is equal, (PCs and farmboys) >... >and quite legitimately, you may not :) I run a varied style to suit the group's style and both their and my mood. But if I decide at some moment that a door is going to close and no-one is in reach, then I don't want a skill that specifically screws up a referee's narrative to, well, screw up my narrative. philip.hibbs@tnt.co.uk or phibbs@compuserve.com 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: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 16:24:00 -0500 From: stancliff@commnections.com Subject: [RQ-RULES] Woundart RU>Do you allow Fireblade and Bladesharp to stack together (to do 3D6 + RU>1D4 + 4, for instance)? If so, you should allow Woundart and RU>FireArrow to stack. I know I don't. I think the designer was right not to let the blade spells stack. Adding strength damage is usually enough. RU>Similarly, if you allow FireArrow and Speedart to RU>stack then so should Woundart and Speedart. If you allow these to stack then you don't need Woundart, it would be redundant with Speedart, and if you made Speedart variable, it would be the missile equivalent to Bladesharp. RU>Multimissile is just too deadly if allowed to stack with spells such as RU>FireArrow/Speedart/Woundart as it destroys even medium-armoured RU>people (even if only the first arrow is affected). Stacking spells onto the first arrow of a MultiMissile is exactly the same as putting it on a missile without MultiMissile (unless you crit), since in an average game the other missiles can't penetrate normal armor plus Protection of 9AP+. RU>For high level characters, give them sorcery or Lunar Manipulates and RU>watch the armour turn to butter. I play a Pavis game, killing a Lunar can get you crucified so players avoid fighting them. Besides, the only people able to throw Lunar manipulations are elite Lunar magicians who are 7 Mothers priests already. RU>Regarding the comparison with Agincourt, they used longbows RU>(1D10 + 1 damage). RQ longbows do 1d8+1 so you are refering to, or suggesting, a modified rule? If you allow missile bonus to be added to strengthened RU>bows (which I do) then they do 1D10 + 1 + 1D4, an average of 9 on a RU>normal hit or 20 on an impale. Bows that add missile damage from strength is another suggested modification? I have Impales do double damage, not normal + max as you seem to run. RU>A normal hit would therefore penetrate RU>normal armour, on average, an impale would destroy a location. With Normal armor without Protection, yes. My players run 14AP+ which bounces your normal hit and stings when you impale. RU>the absence of healing this becomes devastating. Now, add magic and Any damage is devastating to a person without Heal. RU>we add 3 points for a Speedart, nearly breaking a limb on average. If RU>we add Multimissile we do damage to each location struck - a good RU>Multimissile will knock a medium-armoured person down (7 AP and 13 HP RU>would only need 7 missiles to hit to kill him). Is MultiMissile supposed to get the strength bonus for each arrow with your new bow? These are the kind of missile enhancing rules I suggested the game needs. 7AP is Cuirbouilli and Prot 4, I consider that light. Seven hits to kill someone is bad, but at least the arrow is going to do some damage now instead of bouncing. RU>> >Remember, you REALLY don't want your PC's getting a critical impale RU>> > with an arrow that could potentially do 3d6 +1d8 damage. That RU>> >would be what, 52 points of damage, ignoring armor, correct? Special attacks effect the base weapon damage and then modifiers are computed, so this would be wrong even if FireArrow can impale. RU>But, a bad rule is a bad rule. FireArrow always impaled in RQ2 and RU>should still impale, a composite bow doing 3D6 + 9 for an impale, Did FireArrow impale in RQ2? I thought the restriction rule was there too. Where did 3d6+9 come from, it doesn't match any of your examples. I guess this is 3d6 from FireArrow plus 9 for max comp bow arrow instead of 3d6+18 which would be FireArrow damage plus max FireArrow damage. RU>adding 1D8 if Woundart stacks, an average of 24 rather than 19.5, a RU>small change you might think. However, a critical hit does maximum RU>damage - 18 for a FireArrow, 26 for a Woundart/FireArrow. A critical RU>impale would do an extra 9 damage and would take any normal person RU>down. A critical is intended to be fatal on a body or head hit, and incapacitating (severing/maiming) on a limb hit... the opponent has to have a LOT of HP's to survive most crits. I think that the important concept that has been overlooked is that all spells intended for missile enhancement give a moderate bonus at a large MP cost since they only work once and disipate. I don't mind the players having a variable Speedart 4 spell if they are burning 4MP each time they get +8 and +40% (per my spell suggestion). It gives them one chance to be deadly and then they have to try something else. In an extended battle, a Bladesharp 4 would do far more damage per MP because it would be used several times. Firearrow is a damage equalizer for wimps, normal Speedart isn't good enough to be decisive, and MultiMissile is a joke for anything smaller than a Medium Crossbow or Javelin. Try this combat example: take your 2H Spear with Bladesharp 4 and 2d6 strength bonus and castMultiMissile 4, throw it for Javelin damage (1d10 per the errata) and get five attacks at 1d10+4+2d3. Then go pick it up and you still have the Bladesharp. The Bladesharp would not affect the hit% for the throw but it would add the damage (perhaps to only the first missile). This can incapacitate someone in a medium level game. Bob Stancliff (Stancliff@commnections.com) (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 #153 ************************************* *************************************************************************** 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 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.