From: Graeme A Lindsell (gal502@cscgpo.anu.edu.au)
Date: Wed 01 Sep 1993 - 18:43:04 EEST
Me replying to Burton replying to Loren
>%% I like the one stat modifier idea, so let's say that base
>%% chance for climb is based in STR, and since climb is pretty easy the
>
> This sounds like a harkening back to the "Ringworld" rules. It's not
> 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.
>
> This, would end up being VERY incompatible with RQ3, and not just a minor
> change that could be converted easily. I doubt this would fly with the
> "RQ3 similar" restriction.
The compatibility with RQ3 rule is to allow the published scenarios to be
used. Characters in published scenarios already have a set of skills worked out
for them. I doubt the lower end skills (where the effect of differing bases
is most profound) would be shown on most NPC's.
Aside: I think AH are going too far with the "RQ3 compatible" idea. Few
new editions of RPG's are completely compatible with previous editions:
Champions 4th ed, GURPS 3rd (the missile combat rules), even AD&D2 (what
I've seen of it) isn't entirely. I'd like more emphasis on a good rules
system for RQ4, not one that sacrifices its integrity to backwards
compatibliity with RQ3.
> Hmmm. Well, I think if we are pushing for RQlite to be more Glorantha
> 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.
Personally, I'd prefer a updated "Cults of Prax". GoG was best for people
who already knew about Glorantha. CoP would be better for new players. The
appeal of the cult system is it shows people the types of behaviour in
their society. Most of the cults in CoP have been updated in various places
in RQ3 material (River of Cradles, Sun County, Humakt's in ToTRM 5): just
bundle them together, add the small rules changes for RQ4 (say cult limits
on spirit magic, and [please Invisible God!] yearly reusable rune magic
for initiates) and you've got a solid introduction to good player cults.
>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.
Agreed here as well. An elegant set of game mechanics is one thing that
attracts me to a system.
Re: the raging RQLite debate. There seems to be a basic division between
people who want a simplified combat system and those who like the current
system and don't want to lose detail. I think it might be more important
for RQ 4 to be compatible with RQ Lite than with RQ3: probably best
done by printing complete stats for both combat systems in the new scenarios.
If the RQ Lite stats can be short this can be done without taking up too
much space.
Graeme Lindsell a.k.a gal502@huxley.anu.edu.au
0,,
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat 05 Jul 2003 - 20:29:29 EEST