From: Burton Choinski (burt@ptltd.com)
Date: Wed 25 Aug 1993 - 19:07:00 EEST
Graeme A Lindsell on RQskinny...
%% > >If too much of RQ is "dropped" it starts to sound like Melee...
%% >
%% > Melee had the advantage of being easy to learn and very quick to play. To
%% > me, those are good features.
%%
%% I have fond memories of Melee too, but it was very easily minimaxed
%% and got dull after a while.
After all, it looks like we are gunning for RQlite, not RQ-Anorexic :)
%% This is probably a good way to handle it, but there are published
%% adventures (Griffin Island, I believe) where NPC's with spells like
%% Strength 3 are listed with the effects on their skills when they
%% cast it, ie +5 to Agility and Manipulation skills. The clear implication
%% is that in RQIII increases in skill modifiers, even temporary ones,
%% effect skill levels.
%%
%% That said, the idea above is a good one, and could be made part
%% of RQIV or RQLite.
You CAN have it both ways. While mundane STR, DEX, etc increases won't
affect your current skils (but do affect your chance of improving and your
initial level when learning new skills), Magical enhancement will affect
current skill. I see no problem with doing it like this.
%% There was a proposal a few months ago: -10% attack skill = +1 damage. I
%% think allowing that and giving the option -10% to attack skill = -10% to
%% parry or dodge would allow the player to have some input and speed up those
%% 100% skill fights as well.
Only problem with this is you might as well follow it to it's logical
Conclusion -- Subtract defence from offense to get the basic roll. Thus you
can knock it down so that you have >0% and they have 0% of success. At
which point, why bother with seperate attack and defense rolls.?
The use of divisors is almost self-balancing. Yes, the lower-skilled person
doesn't get hurt as badly as the higher-skilled one, but you avoid the
above problem.
===============================================================================
David Dunham on my RQtweaked...
%% > * Fatigue Level
%%
%% Can't be RQ-Lite if it has fatigue :-)
*sound of 3 broos breaking into David's house to give him a sound beating* :)
Wiseguy. :) At present I was trying to organize the draft a bit better.
Pruning is the next step. Add not everything is filled in yet anyways.
%% > * Agility
%% > STR + DEX - SIZ - 10
...
%% > * Stealth
%% > DEX + (INT+CON)/2 - (SIZ+POW)/2 - 10
%%
%% I like this calculation much better than the RQ3 technique. (It's the
%% formula though, isn't it?)
I have felt that formula are easeir to explain to a new player then trying
%% > Total body HP equals SIZ+CON.
Actually, this was in response to the dislike of worrying about negative
to go over the primary-secondary-negative business.
%%
%% Ooh, no longer RQ-compatible! Is this not a constraint? I thought they
%% wanted to be able to use all the published scenarios.
numbers here. Instead of going from -(SIZ+CON)/2 to (SIZ+CON)/2 why not
just go from 0 to SIZ+CON, with effects taking place at low values of HP?
%% > * To increase STR, CON, INT, DEX or APP from the original value to 1/3
%% > the maximum possible increase costs 8 background points per +1
%% > improvement.
%%
%% I found this somewhat confusing/complex in the RQ4 draft, especially
%% because there's almost always rounding involved (e.g. you can increase by 4
%% points). How about something simple like (I haven't tweaked the numbers)
I think the simplest way to do it is probably 2x the next attribute level
in BP. So, going from 15 to 16 takes 32 BP. Each increase takes one of
your allowed improvements for your level of character (novice, trained, etc).
%% > Idea re strike ranks: a system based directly on stats. Melee initiative
%% >is Size + Dex, Missile/Spells Int + Dex. Higher number goes first, and the
%%
%% Or to cut down the numbers, SIZ + DEX - 10 and INT + DEX - 10. This is
%% simpler, assuming we need to know who goes first (Pendragon manages to be
%% simultaneous, and RQ attack and parry could be considered simultaneous,
%% even with the same weapon [they're close enough in fencing]).
I don't see the problem with figuring SR numbers, rather then using stats.
You don't recalculate them THAT much.
-- Burton
0,,
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat 05 Jul 2003 - 20:29:06 EEST