ARMOUR, DAMAGE, CHARISMA

From: Malcolm Cohen (malcolm@nag.co.uk)
Date: Tue 15 Jun 1993 - 12:31:25 EEST


> I'd also like to get back to armor and helms being described more like
> they were in RQ2. The old chart described typical pieces of armor, and

I agree that this gives more colour to the armour description.

It took perhaps 6 months for a group of my players to realise that there were
great advantages in wearing a fairly solidly built helm even when they could
not afford (or carry!) mega-armour all over; they only dropped to this because
some NPC's did it!

The current table discourages such mixing of armour types; the rules overall
are complicated enough so that people will either not notice such things or be
put off by the messiness of extra calculations.

> I have most of this table worked out, and will post if anyone asks.

Please?

DAMAGE:

> >> None of the proposed changes seem different enough (to me) from RQ3
> >> to warrant promulagation. If you're keeping bascially the same damage
> >> bonus for a given strength, why not keep the old system? If you want

(Not having seen the RQ4 draft, I assume it has the same bonus system as RQ3).
Because I always (even when RQ2 first came out!) thought the damage bonus system
was broken! It changes in big jumps, this is unnecessary and a real downer on
those who just miss out on the +d4: d8+1 is *SO* much less that d8+1+d4 in
getting though armour etc.

So I just broke down the increments into smaller steps, viz
+1,+d2,+d3,+d4,+d5,+d6,...

> This system can also be used to determine damage from Bows, etc., by counting
> 2 x STR and ignoring size altogether.

If the SR system is going to use SIZ as an abstraction of height & reach I see
no reason why the (non-Cross)bow damage system should ignore it. Just use the
normal damage mod here.

CHARISMA:

Replacing RQ3APP with RQ2CHA would definitely be an improvement; like Loren I
find APP next to useless and prone to sexism. Even the simple removal of APP
would be better than keeping it.

I see nothing wrong with using the term "Charisma" for it, it is reasonably
accurate usage...

-- 
...........................Malcolm Cohen, NAG Ltd., Oxford, U.K.
                           (malcolm@nag.co.uk)

0,,

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat 05 Jul 2003 - 20:27:46 EEST