Re: More RQ-Lite comments

From: Graeme A Lindsell (gal502@cscgpo.anu.edu.au)
Date: Wed 01 Sep 1993 - 00:28:31 EEST


 Me replying to Dave again
> I feel the current system is unrealistic. Impaling someone a second before
> their mace was due to land on your skull wouldn't necessarily stop the mace
> from continuing in its arc.

 But it could. What if it was 2 seconds before? A round is about 6 seconds.
If you assume all combat is simultaneous,then you'll have a lot of people
killing each other simultaneously. Too many people IMHO.

>
> >From: Tim Posney <timp@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU>
> >i.e. is an 03 a critical?
> > answer - subtract 1 and multiply by 20, giving 40. Is this still a hit
> > if so then it is a critical hit.

> >i.e. is 17 a special?
> > answer subtract 1 and multiply by 5, giving 80, is this still a hit?
> > if so then it is a special hit.
>
> Clever. _That_ could go on the character sheet if necessary...

 Yeah. I could see introducing a new AD&D player to RQ: "all you have to
do is subtract 1 and multiply by 20: it's simple!". Yes, this system works,
and I'll use it myself but it's an terrible introduction to a new game.

 This is my motive for putting the table on the character sheet: a new
game should be _minimum effort_ for a new player. One problem with RQ3
is the table only appears twice in the pack: it should be all over the
place!

> >%% Frankly speaking, I don't think you need both a critical system and a
> >%% hit location system in the same game; they cover the same function.
>

 I agree with this. I like the feel hit locations give to a game, knowing
where you are wounded somehow brings you closer to your character, but
it is a lot of work.
 
 Graeme Lindsell a.k.a gal502@huxley.anu.edu.au

 


0,,


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat 05 Jul 2003 - 20:29:25 EEST