From: owner-runequest-rules@ (RuneQuest Rules Digest) To: runequest-rules-digest@lists.MPGN.COM Subject: RuneQuest Rules Digest V1 #187 Reply-To: runequest-rules@mpgn.com Sender: owner-runequest-rules@ Errors-To: owner-runequest-rules@ Precedence: bulk RuneQuest Rules Digest Friday, October 16 1998 Volume 01 : Number 187 RuneQuest is a trademark of Hasbro/Avalon Hill Games. All Rights Reserved. TABLE OF CONTENTS Re: [RQ-RULES] BFRP - Characteristics Re: [RQ-RULES] BFRP Weapon Damage Re: [RQ-RULES] category modifiers Re: [RQ-RULES] %-based Skill Difficulty RE: [RQ-RULES] category modifiers [RQ-RULES] Rules List Re: [RQ-RULES] BFRP skills rules [RQ-RULES] Mana vs Manna Re: [RQ-RULES] BFRP - Characteristics Re: [RQ-RULES] BFRP Pre-Mission Statement [RQ-RULES] BFRP Designer personality traits, damage, armor [RQ-RULES] BFRP Designer Re: [RQ-RULES] Request fof info and digest [RQ-RULES] Test Re: [RQ-RULES] Re: Converging two excellent projects Re: [RQ-RULES] Test Re: [RQ-RULES] Rules List Re: [RQ-RULES] Test [RQ-RULES] %-based Skill Difficulty 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: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 12:33:50 -0400 From: "Bob Stancliff" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] BFRP - Characteristics > Alain : > > I am happy with the current seven RQ characteristics. > > But may be we can roll them with 3D6+2, giving a range between 5 > > and 20. > This would mean that when I ask everyone to roll on their DEXx5%, some > characters will always have 100% which is no fun (IMHO). It also means > that nonhumans with higher than human stats will be well over 20. > Simon Hibbs Anyone with a decent Coordinate spell will be over 100% on a Dex x5%. You could also switch to Dex x4% to lower the scale. This is the kind of reason why the rules say that 96%+ is always a failure. Admit that some players will have semi-divine Dex, at least during combat, and work it into your story telling (have you seen what they do in Zena or Hercules?). Bob Stancliff (stanclif@ufl.edu) 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. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 12:45:41 -0400 From: "Bob Stancliff" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] BFRP Weapon Damage > What are we suggesting the effects of a critical or special should be? > Do we say that a special for a slashing or crushing weapons does no extra > damage as per the official RQ3 rules? Do we revert to RQ2 idea of different > rules for each damage type? Or do we amend it with some new ideas? > Paul Bestwick I have slashing weapons special for Max Weapon Damage and can sever, Crushing weapons special for Max Strength Bonus and get bonus knockback, Impaling weapons special for Double Weapon Damage and do additional damage in following rounds until removed. A critical is a special that bypasses armor and protections except parry or dodge. Bob Stancliff (stanclif@ufl.edu) 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. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 12:50:33 -0400 From: "Bob Stancliff" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] category modifiers > I presume that you are counting attack/parry as being *the same* as > manipulation and/or agility, not just *the same calculation*, in RQ they are > technically not the same category, they are just calculated the same way. > philip.hibbs@tnt.co.uk I think that this is incorrect. They are the same. Bob *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 12:58:12 -0400 From: "Bob Stancliff" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] %-based Skill Difficulty > This may have already been suggested, but I just had an idea on > how to have skills of differing difficulty without tiresome lists. Why not > otherwise handled (perhaps the base would only apply once the skill was > acquired). > > This would solve the problem of over-rapid skill increase. It > would also allow base skills to reflect the full percentile system of RQ3. > What do you think? > -->Pete Man, Pete, if we did this, all character progression would be cut in half or worse. The campaigns would get even longer while players slogged up to proficiency. Did you see the discussion three months ago about Bronze Age people mastering their daily skills by the very early twenties? Bob *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 18:00:41 +0100 From: "Hibbs, Philip" Subject: RE: [RQ-RULES] category modifiers >> attack/parry as being *the same* as manipulation and/or >> agility, not just *the same calculation*, in RQ they are technically >> not the same category, they are just calculated the same way. >I think that this is incorrect. They are the same. I'll check it, but it's not that important, unless you are using Nikk Effingham's character gen rules, and take certain advantages or disadvantages. philip.hibbs@tnt.co.uk 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: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 13:10:29 -0400 From: Richard Ohlson Subject: [RQ-RULES] Rules List I would like to second both the recomendation that the RQ-RULES list be made into a digest format. 50 messages in five hours is ridiculous. I also would like to agree with whoever recomended that the New BRP discusion start up a new list. Rich *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 13:11:07 -0400 From: "Bob Stancliff" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] BFRP skills rules > >Normal human stats should probably be 3d6+1 > > Eh? +1? > philip.hibbs@tnt.co.uk Reason being that a size 4 is about as small as an adult human can get, the pygmy range runs up to about size 7 or 8. You really don't want the other stats going below 4 either. It also allows for the unique stat 19 NPC to come along and show up the PC's (he is blessed by the gods). 3d6+1 gives a good probability distribution for the human normal. '4d6 best 3' for PC's gives a much better average, but still allows some poor stats. An alternative is to take 80 (or 85) stat points and put them where you want. A combined method says roll first and if your total is below 80 (or 85), then add enough points to make it equal. Bob Stancliff (stanclif@ufl.edu) 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. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 12:31:12 -0500 From: "Guy Hoyle" Subject: [RQ-RULES] Mana vs Manna > Mana > was fluffy white edible cotton that grows in deserts. You have "mana" confused with "manna". Mana (one n) was the magical force inherent in all things, but particularly associated with powerful chieftains and holy men; to touch them was taboo, since it drained off their mana. Manna (two n's) was the stuff that miraculously sustained the Israelites during the Exodus. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 11:01:36 -0700 From: "Dana and Cynthia Myers" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] BFRP - Characteristics Simon Hibbs wrote: >I'd rather have 2D6+6 across the board than 3D6. That way I wouldn't >feel bad about making players keep stats of 8. They still get 40% on a >stat by 5 roll! > > I don't mind playign characters with a severe flaw now and then. What i >don't like is having to play a character with a severe flaw when I don't >want to - when it doesn't fit with what I want to do with that >character. A characteristic of 3 is a severe flaw, but a stat of 8 is a >weakness I can live with. > > >Simon Hibbs How about keeping the 3-18 range, but allow for different rolling methods,such as done by ad+d; 4d6 drop low roll, or 3d6 reroll 1's. that would allow for more "heroic" characters. I must admit though, I have played and see no problem playing low stat characters. One of my all time favorites had one 14 stat, and all others below 11. Just (un)luck of the roll, I just emphisized rollplaying out the character, not the stats. Although, when I brought him to a con. the Gm told me he was to weak for the game, and asked if I had a more powerfull character.... Oh well. Dana *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:13:03 -0400 From: "Bob Stancliff" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] BFRP Pre-Mission Statement > A word of warning: if anyone is touting a particular system, they will be > expected to write it up! Bob, you haven't volunteered to be a BFRP designer, > so your skill relationships system will only have a chance of making it into > "Advanced Skills" is if anyone else wants to write it up. So, either put > your name forward, or see your life's work fall by the wayside! I will be doing my own set of rules for my campaign. If I finish it I will put it on my web site and let you know. In the last three days I have gotten 180 e-mail messages and heard three or four good ideas, plus a lot of talk about games I don't know and will never play. Bob Stancliff (stanclif@ufl.edu) 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. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 19:24:18 +0100 From: Sergio Mascarenhas Subject: [RQ-RULES] BFRP Designer personality traits, damage, armor here is what I intend on doing: (Notice: a good part of it departs from BPR/RQ mechanics.In any case, I will always try to achieve a system that's simpler then RQ, unless the added complexity makes sense and doesn't turn into a playing nightmare.) Personality traits This is something that's absent from RQ, so in a sense this means that I'll be adding complexity, instead of making the system more simple. I think that these are really important. They will not be based on Pendragon concepts, though. No numbers on it. They will be particularly useful for GMs, but players should use them too. Why do I think they are a requirement? Because they may make chargen more heavy, but they can contribute to a more simple and more interesting game. An example: suppose that Courage is a personality trait. A Coward may stop fighting long before he dies (either by runing away, or by surrendering). So, fights will not be to death. If this happens, we can keep a complex and detailed combat system at the phisiological level, without having to iterate it all the way until someone is ready to meet his god. I always thought that one of the criticisms made to RQ - that combat lasts too long - - was right, not because RQ's combat rules were cumbersome, but because they didn't account for psycology of fighting. Damage A system without HP that keeps the key aspects of RQ's damage system, without the need to record-keeping and constant accounting. A system that distinguishes different types of damage - cut, perforation, shop, impact. This adds variety to weapons and makes the game more realistic. Armor A system that accounts for the fact that different types of armor have different capabilities to block different types of damage. Sergio *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 13:30:25 -0500 From: "Beyke, Maurice A" Subject: [RQ-RULES] BFRP Designer I would like to help on Shamanism & Spirit Magic rules. I've proposed a variant on the RQ4 list that a lot of people liked; I could send that in if anyone is interested, but it's kind of long. ==== Boris *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 18:51:47 GMT From: mikec@room3b.demon.co.uk (Michael Cule) Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Request fof info and digest The GURPS Lite rules are on SJG's website in PDF format or in the back of GURPS Discworld. - -- Michael Cule *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 15:10:18 -0400 From: Tal Meta Subject: [RQ-RULES] Test This is a test. Is there a RQ list I'm unaware of? - -- talmeta@bellatlantic.net - I *am* one of the Chosen Few! ICQ - 12594453 AIM - talmeta1 TANJ Lives! - Alternate Homepage - *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 15:17:39 -0400 From: Tal Meta Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Re: Converging two excellent projects Mystic Musk Ox wrote: > > Sergio's suggestion on combining the BRP and Jorune group made me > think of another background which is extremely detailed, yet has > very little support in terms of a decent game system: Tekumel. > The recent publication of Gardasiyal didn't do much to help this... I'm on the digest version of the Jorune list, and was surprised to see a number of familiar faces cropping up there (from here, the Delta Green list, and elsewhere). I only have the 3rd ed. Jorune rules, and gave converting the isho system only a cursory glance, at best. But if anyone wants to do a conversion, I'd be happy to assist. (as an aside, I've filed a request for a RQ-Rules-Projects list... we'll see what happens.) - -- talmeta@bellatlantic.net - I *am* one of the Chosen Few! ICQ - 12594453 AIM - talmeta1 TANJ Lives! - Alternate Homepage - *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:46:24 -0700 From: Joseph Elric Smith Servant to Arioch Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Test are yo aware of this one? ken Tal Meta wrote: > This is a test. Is there a RQ list I'm unaware of? > > -- > talmeta@bellatlantic.net - I *am* one of the Chosen Few! *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 16:07:33 -0400 From: Tal Meta Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Rules List Richard Ohlson wrote: > > I would like to second both the recomendation that the RQ-RULES list be made into a digest > format. 50 messages in five hours is ridiculous. There is a digest version. Send mail to: majordomo@mpgn.com with the following in the message body: subscribe runequest-rules-digest (you can add unsubscribe runequest-rules on the line beneath that to get off the main list). > I also would like to agree with whoever recomended that the New BRP discusion start up a > new list. Being worked on. - -- talmeta@bellatlantic.net - I *am* one of the Chosen Few! ICQ - 12594453 AIM - talmeta1 TANJ Lives! - Alternate Homepage - *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 17:03:53 -0400 From: Tal Meta Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Test Joseph Elric Smith Servant to Arioch wrote: > > are yo aware of this one? Heh. Yes I am. Phillip Hibbs wrote me a message stating that he was receiving Rules list posts from a Tansoft.com address; I posted to it and it came out here. Odds are tansoft is a subsidiary of MPGN, and they share the same machines/resources, so occasionally they get sent out with the 'wrong' from address. Go figure. :) - -- talmeta@bellatlantic.net - I *am* one of the Chosen Few! ICQ - 12594453 AIM - talmeta1 TANJ Lives! - Alternate Homepage - *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 17:43:09 -0400 From: David Weihe Subject: [RQ-RULES] %-based Skill Difficulty > From: "Hibbs, Philip" philip.hibbs@tnt.co.uk > I don't like that idea of base > % being from 1 to 6, that means that basically you have to figure in > childhood and adolescent learning as well as occupational, and no skill can > be used "at base". I'm not sure that this _is_ a bad idea. Especially in barbarian and nomad cultures, having the pre-adults assist adults is the main way to learn common tasks. A shortsword starts at 25% base because it is easy to use, not because everyone learned how to before they get to adulthood. OTOH, every Praxian should know something of animal care by age 12, and a lot more than a DH street kid, or even adult, should. Childhood learning skills would be from a reduced set (I don't care that your father _was_ a shaman, you don't start out with 50% Summon) such as no magic or non-universal weapons (eg, knives, rocks, clubs, and natural weapons, but no swords, spears, or missiles). A trader's child might get to learn other languages, or get legibility in a normally-unliterate culture. Otherwise, how to you explain King David's apparent sling mastery while still a boy (killing Goliath of Gath)? Also, the idea that people become adults as identical except for stats seems a bit wrong. Basic experience is only calculated at PC creation. *************************************************************************** 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 #187 ************************************* *************************************************************************** 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.