weapons; resurrection

Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Colin Watson (watson@computing-science.aberdeen.ac.uk)
Date: Mon 18 Oct 1993 - 23:01:07 EET

Thanks to those who gave comments about the benefits and drawbacks of 1-H swords. To recap: I was concerned about how expensive broadswords were in comparison to cheap-and-cheerful 1-H spears (same damage, same SR, same AP) and I wondered why people would use them.

From the reaction I think an important factor, which I hadn't fully considered, is the portability of swords. It should be much easier to carry a spare broadsword around than a spare shortspear. I think the difference should be somewhat more than 0.5 ENC!
I also think that swords should have more AP (or spears should have less).

And, of course, Sandy Peterson's ideas about weapons damaging each other make good sense. (My sorceress gets really annoyed when her Greatsword is damaged by a pesky pike!).


Graeme A Lindsell:
>I've become a bit worried about the great advantages RQ seems to
>give the 2 handed weapons. [...] The only advantages with
>using 2 1 handed weapons are the ability to parry on the same SR
>you attack and the coverage shields gives against missile fire.
>Are there any others?

Well, the coverage of shields vs missile fire *is* a fairly big advantage, especially in battlefield conditions.
And big shields can give a lot more AP to parry with than 2-H weapons. But the main bonus of using a two-weapon combination comes when one of your arms is incapacitated. If you wield a two-handed weapon and you lose the use of an arm then you're in deep trouble. If you use two weapons then at least you have the option of parrying (or maybe attacking) with your good arm the next round. (I'm fairly certain that real troops wouldn't think like this, but from a game point of view it makes a big difference). In my experience, characters with weapon+shield seem to last longer than two-handed maniacs. They don't deal as much damage, but they *survive* longer.


Resurrection:
I'm not in the habit of taking "King of Sartar" too literally, but I thought I'd have a look at what it had to say about Chalana Arroy and Resurrection. Sure, it says CA priestesses sometimes raise the dead. But then it goes on to say that the process CAs use to recover their major magicks is rather unusual: in fact it mentions, cryptically, that "7x7x2 participants" are required for the ceremony to recover use of their mighty spells (presumably to recover re-usable Resurrect). Does anyone know what this means?

If it's open to interpretation, then it could radically affect the availability of Resurrection in a campaign:

These three possible options give plenty of scope for controlling the amount of Resurrection available.

___
CW.
From: RuneQuest-Request@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (RQ Digest Maintainer) To: RuneQuest@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (Daily automated RQ-Digest) Subject: RuneQuest Daily, Tue, 19 Oct 1993, part 2 Reply-To: RuneQuest@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (RuneQuest Daily) Sender: RuneQuest-Request@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM Precedence: junk

The RuneQuest Daily and RuneQuest Digest deal with the subjects of Avalon Hill's RPG and Greg Stafford's world of Glorantha.

Send submissions and followup to "RuneQuest@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM", they will automatically be included in a next issue. Try to change the Subject: line from the default Re: RuneQuest Daily... on replying.

Selected articles may also appear in a regular Digest. If you want to submit articles to the Digest only, contact the editor at RuneQuest-Digest-Editor@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM.

Send enquiries and Subscription Requests to the editor:

RuneQuest-Request@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (Henk Langeveld)

Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 10 Oct 2003 - 01:31:56 EEST