From: Nick Brooke (100270.337@CompuServe.COM)
Date: Tue 08 Jun 1993 - 00:42:49 EEST
The Game System
Skill vs Skill
In combat, we are prepared to accept that a successful Dodge evades a
successful Attack (i.e: that the status quo prevails if both rolls
succeed). Why add a third (resistance) roll to force a result in every
other case of skill vs skill resulting in a tie?
Active vs Passive Example
Replace "sneak across a nightingale floor" with "sneak through dry
underbrush", or anything else that player characters have some chance of
doing in normal life (outside of dungeon bashes). I've never met a
nightingale floor in all my years of role-playing, and wouldn't know what
to do with one if I did. Why start new players on the wrong track?
POW Gain Rolls
I hate POW gain rolls. They unbalance every RQ campaign against every
be, etc. Also, players distort their characters' behaviour in order to earn
them: worse than with other "skill checks", as the potential reward is
I would like to abolish them, and characteristic training in general, and
other, as no two GMs concur on when to allow them, how frequent they should
higher.
go the Pendragon way. Any active character under age 35 gets a free point
per year in any characteristic of his or her choice (other than SIZ after
age 21); priests/shamans/ wizards would get an extra point of POW on top of
this. Coupled with automatic characteristic losses for major (maiming)
wounds [-1 STR if chest, CON if abdomen, SIZ if legs, INT if head, DEX if
arms wounded by 2x basic location hit points] this would add fluidity and
individual variety to the game.
(Note also that if "one-use" Rune magic becomes one use per year, as
Skill Training and Research
Remove EVERY option to take a fixed increase instead of a die roll. If we
Weight Loss
Why do you lose current and original CON points for gaining or losing too
suggested below, the need for constant POW gains is largely evaporated).
are afraid of being unlucky, why do we role-play with dice at all? These
ludicrous opt-outs distend the rules and provide shelter for whining
cowards. Be firm: let them grow up, or drop out!
much weight? This seems odd to me. Is there a reason, or did it just seem
like a good idea at the time? (For example, as False SIZ doesn't add to hit
points, the fatter you are the less injury you can take. Maybe this is why
you needed the armour rules criticised below).
Characters should just subtract any positive Weight Modifier from STR for
encumbrance purposes, rather than literally "carrying around" the extra
flab. This simplifies record-keeping and is essentially similar (as one
point of STR can carry 5 ENC); why be pedantic?
I dislike immensely your rule giving out +1 AP per four points of False
SIZ. This makes Weights of +4, +8, +12 into threshold values. I would
prefer to give out no bonus at all: let the fatties suffer! But then I'm a
slimline 12.5 stone myself, and biased by it. If fat gives no armour but
takes away no hit points, it's pretty nicely balanced. You might even allow
weight modifier to increase or decrease hit points by itself, to compensate
for the CON loss you want to impose. (In your example, you forget to
Results of Damage
I think dying of thirst or starvation would be among the last of my worries
if I was unconscious with a head wound. This looks intensely silly, and
Fatigue
In general, this system is greatly preferable to the RQ3 nightmare (did
mention that Fatstaff the Merchant will lose a hit point for his sickening
over-indulgence: NOT a trivial point).
should be changed: bleeding to death or dying from exposure are far more
immediate risks.
anyone really use it?) A few glitches or needless complexities are
discussed below.
Mounted Characters
Cut the long-winded "half total ENC" method; replace it with the quick and
simple "plus one to Fatigue class". What does "exact" mean in these
circumstances?
Fumbles
These become far too common with weary or exhausted characters having 10-
Sancta Simplicitas
"When crossing more difficult terrain, multiply the above distances and the
practical maximum daily movement rate (and any amount moved beyond that) by
the appropriate percentage for the terrain... Modifiers are cumulative...
I rest my case. Write proper movement rules that you don't need a
Exposure, Hunger, Sleeplessness, Thirst, and Other Slow Deaths
Tedious and mechanical rules to replace gamemaster fiat. A paragraph saying
that the GM can play around with fatigue, hit points, healing rates and so
20%+ chances to fumble. I'd suggest adding 1% to the fumble chances of
tired, 2% for weary, or 4% for exhausted characters. Still tough, but not
so ludicrously dangerous.
Arlia will have to make another fatigue roll every 0.11 kilometers..."
calculator to use.
on to suit himself would be more economical. I can't see anything wrong
with your methods, but they remind me of the good old underwater
brontosaurus tail-lash rules from RQ3: anyone who needed them would be able
to work out a system that was better for the one-off occasion when they
were needed. And do you really think you could lose 6 HP for going one day
without a drink? Your mechanism is trying to kill people after three or
four days, not examine how they feel after one or two - which is by far the
more common occurrence. 1d3 HP off for one day without.
Combat
I hate hex grid combat systems. They upset anyone who can role-play without
artificial aids: maps, counters, figures and all the other paraphernalia of
a misspent youth. I would prefer it greatly if all the references to RQ
combat on a hex grid were removed from the body of the rules and collated
in an 8-page booklet (like the old Charts & Tables book). Players who use a
hex grid will be pleased as they will need to refer to it constantly to
sort out trifling arguments that don't bother proper role-players; we, on
the other hand, will be able to store it with our Monster Coliseum
racetrack maps as another addition to the rare field of RQ forgettabilia,
and carry on playing the way we always did.
I hate strike ranks, but you've already read about that.
Which perception skills are you including in the category of "most" which
can be used in combat at half skill? Taste? Track? Balance? It seems to me
that Scan skills (including Earth- or Darksense variants) and Listen are
the only ones that could reasonably be used.
Zero Action Options
Last on the list should read as follows: "Speaking briefly (up to seven
Maneuver Skill
Horrible and unnecessary. This should either expand to fill the rules and
Critical Hits
Critical hits are too vicious: enhanced special damage, plus some more,
words; speaking more would require an action)". Communicating via
Mindspeech or Mindlink should of course be listed AFTER this, as it's
presumably less commonly done. Counting words is an infantile pastime that
takes more time to referee than the actual speaking does: let them speak
within reason for one action, rather than insisting on 7/14/21 word
sentences.
eventually replace the DEXx5% roll, the DEX characteristic itself, the
Strike Rank system, and any similar concepts, or else it should be killed
at once. What can this do that a DEXx5% roll can't?
through all armour and magic: why not just kill the guy outright? Oh yes,
you need these so you can fight Dream Dragons and Crimson Bats, do you?
Well, you should go into fights like that relying on something a bit less
chancy than a critical hit to bail you out of trouble...
Special Hits, Special Options, and Optional Location Effects
Wonderful to see slashes and crushes back in play. Maybe you should run the
impale/slash/crush rules together with the Special Options
The location effects look fine. Specific examples of which Gloranthan
(feint/flurry/weave/etc.) as other special options in their own right: as
you can't do special damage and use a special option at the same time, it
makes no real difference, but does force weapon users to consider their
fighting style more closely.
cultures prefer which Special Options are a must: perhaps you could list
all the most common Dragon Pass weapon and option combinations, and explain
where the others come from? Otherwise this is another "generic" rule that
Is there really no DEX requirement to Feint? A Flurry should depend on STR
will end up dividing campaigns from one another.
alone (the Airy characteristic), and not have a wimpish DEX opt-out clause
tagged on to encourage weedy emulators of my Orlanthi prowess. Why doesn't
Weave have a Maneuver prerequisite? Answer: because Maneuver skill is a
mechanic that doesn't fit into the game system! And why has DEX 13 become
so important all of a sudden? It's like living in RQ2 again: thresholds,
thresholds everywhere!
Dodging by Large Creatures
In what sense is an attack "directed at" a location of a large creature? If
you're trying to say that humans only hit the nearest bits of giants
(attacking limbs if attacked), and likewise rubble runners and humans, why
not say so? This rule is sensible but unclear. Rewrite it.
"High Ground on Horseback"
Call the advantage of "high ground" an advantage of height: it's more
generally applicable.
Weapons List
Glad to see your javelins have caught up with mine at last!
Remove the naginata, shuriken, kukri et al. from the basic weapon list and
I am a great fan of culturally-specific weapons lists; if the RQ4 table was
broken up into Primitive, Nomadic, Barbarian, Civilized and Exotic weapons
rules examples. Where we come from nobody uses them; where they come from
the gamemaster has already put enough time and effort into designing a
campaign to create his own weapons list as well. Also, call a shortsword a
shortsword, a javelin a javelin, and find some non-academic term for
"composite bow" - horn bow, back bow, double bow, anything but this
horrible technical term that almost kills the game for me each time I see
it used.
I'd be a happy man (and players would produce more reasonably-equipped
characters).
Overlapping Armour
Your new rules (halve the value of what's underneath) look good to me.
0,,
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat 05 Jul 2003 - 20:27:29 EEST