From: bradfurst@aol.com
Date: Thu 10 Feb 1994 - 21:04:02 EET
As I read through the discussions of Fatigue and skills greater than 100%, I
wonder. Am I correct, that when the problem is discussed, the problem
involves whether combat is decided by killing or disabling the opponent (and
whether that defeat comes by luck or by skill)?
(...Another writer recently inquired "Are we playing D&D...?")
I am reminded of the stories of heroes such as Robin Hood (and John
Little), Theseus (and Pirithoos), Sherlock Holmes (and Moriarty) etc. Heroic
confrontation between Master Heroes does *not* need to be characterized by
elimination. Many of the best legends are about the friendship or continuing
enmity resulting from *stalemates*.
RuneQuest combat can easily -- and very appropriately -- drag into
stalemates. At that point, the characters should choose to interact without
combat. Try ransom. Try surrender. Try friendship. Try agreeing to
disagree. If the players need to play characters who must crush, kill, and
destroy, then the players should consider to play D&D.
In those situations where the enemy Master must be destroyed
(neutralised?) because of differences of race or creed or politics or war or
chaos or whatever, then the standard RuneQuest ploy can be used: outnumber
the opponent. RuneQuest is, and has been, notorious for the danger of being
outnumbered.
Please, as you all reconsider Fatigue and Combat Skills Over 100%, think
also about the supporting parties, not just the elite pair who think they are
alone struggling toe to toe.
0,,
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat 05 Jul 2003 - 20:34:51 EEST