From: Burton Choinski (burt@ptltd.com)
Date: Wed 01 Sep 1993 - 02:34:07 EEST
Loren J. Miller
%% I'm not sure if you understood me. I mean that you would have a base
%% chance for a skill that would depend on stat(s) and difficulty, and
%% when rolling percentiles to see if the skill goes up you add the base
%% chance.
I understand what you are saying, but that has the effect of increasing
the MAXIMUM skill as well as making it easier to go up. If supposedly
"all percentages are equal", where 50% dagger means the same as 50%
flail, you end up in this case where the former might well have a maximum
20% higher then the latter.
Using different dice increases the rate of increase, but the maximums would
%% I like the one stat modifier idea, so let's say that base
This sounds like a harkening back to the "Ringworld" rules. It's not
This, would end up being VERY incompatible with RQ3, and not just a minor
%% I don't think that you can do justice to divine magic in a Lite rules
Hmmm. Well, I think if we are pushing for RQlite to be more Glorantha
be the same, based on Manipulation.
%% chance for climb is based in STR, and since climb is pretty easy the
a bad idea, but skills will need to be rearranged in different areas...
most craft skills woul dbe more DEX based, but some might be more dependant
on STR.
change that could be converted easily. I doubt this would fly with the
"RQ3 similar" restriction.
%% set. Just look at the RQ3 Magic book to see a really weak explanation
%% of divine magic.
based, i.e. back to it's roots, then an updated GoG with notes on divine
magic should be made. I don't know how AH has it's book data. If in
computer someplace it may be relatively painless to crank it out quickly.
%%
%% I like them too, but they take too long to qualify as Lite. Thus I'd
%% hand out templates to players for their first characters and let them
%% work on things longer, later, if they wanted to. Also, remember the
%% full rules are always available in the Advanced rules.
On the contrary, I feel they are much quicker then even RQ3. Remember, in
RQ3 you had to determine number of years in a profession, then multiply
that by the modifiers. Or even worse, a year by year determination of
background.
Compared to that, picking a level and reading off the table is fairly
painless. And after all, it's only done once. I don't see Char-gen as
something that need be stripped to the nub for speed sake. Hell, if you
speed, just let them take 1 template at a GM specified level, with no
optional skills. Instant character, with a reasonable skill set.
But for those that want the detail of multi-careers, chopping it out just
makes it HARDER to handle.
===============================================================================
Malcolm Cohen
%% What I want to see is a version of RQ which is not more "complicated" than
%% RQ3 but is more effective - i.e. the complications actually give us
%% something worthwhile (unlike, to pick everyone's favourite, RQ3 fatigue).
%% But I do not see the need to chop out bits of the system which have
%% withstood the test of time.
Agreed. We want a streamlining of clumsy mechanics (using "rules of thumb"
rather than look-up tables, a-la the "ROLLx20 critcal, ROLLx5 special"
rule rather than a division or table look up, the use of
"A-B+10 or less" rule for the resistance table (now THAT was a waste of
book space :), etc.)
===============================================================================
Joerg Baumgartner
%% The exact nature of modifyers (multiply/divide versus add/substract) has
%% been the topic of many a discussion I had about RQ4 with the players of
%% my group. Both tend to be unfair and unbalanced: either the lower skills
%% are effectively reduced to zero (1 to 5 succeeds), or the higher skills
%% are penalized more than the lower. Neither is the desired effect. Any
%% ideas to solve this?
It's a tough call. Perhaps we should just roll 1d6 for every 10% of skill,
higher roll wins. Difficulty adds dice to the oppenent (i.e. a 5d difficulty
normally becomes 6d or more with hinderances, 4d or less if you get help.)
I can see the heresy hammers coming out already :)
===============================================================================
David Dunham
%% Hit locations aren't _that_ difficult, but they're one more rule. I suggest
%% their removal more for speed.
Hit locations are one of the better aspects of RQ. Too many times we'd
be running other systems and try and cobble some way of doing locations into
the "body hits".
Just having hit points reduces targets to mounds of meat, designed to be
hacked until they stop moving. Once you have to worry about losing your
arm (or head), I've seen MUCH more use of tactics and covering vital areas
to prevent loss of same. :)
-- Burton
Babyl Options:
Append:1
Version:5
Reformat-Headers-P
Summary-Window-Format: Use Default
0,,
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat 05 Jul 2003 - 20:29:27 EEST