So, who bought the RQ6 rules?

Discover the Legend RPG, Mongoose's fantasy game.
User avatar
danskmacabre
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 721
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 6:59 pm
Contact:

So, who bought the RQ6 rules?

Postby danskmacabre » Thu Jul 05, 2012 11:51 am

I got them yesterday and they're pretty decent.
I'll be integrating them into my Legend/Elric campaign.

Anyone else got them?
Opinions?

IMO it feels like:
Legend to RQ6 is the same as
DnD 3.5 to Pathfinder.

Still like Legend mind, but I'll definitely be using RQ6 elements in my Elric campaign.
User avatar
DigitalMage
Banded Mongoose
Posts: 330
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 1:07 pm
Location: UK

Re: So, who bought the RQ6 rules?

Postby DigitalMage » Thu Jul 05, 2012 11:56 am

danskmacabre wrote:Legend to RQ6 is the same as
DnD 3.5 to Pathfinder.
Careful, that doesn't actually sell me on RQ6 :)
User avatar
danskmacabre
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 721
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 6:59 pm
Contact:

Re: So, who bought the RQ6 rules?

Postby danskmacabre » Thu Jul 05, 2012 11:58 am

DigitalMage wrote:
danskmacabre wrote:Legend to RQ6 is the same as
DnD 3.5 to Pathfinder.
Careful, that doesn't actually sell me on RQ6 :)

Heh, I meant that more as RQ6 is more of a progression of a set of rules on Legend, as is Pathfinder over 3.5.
Not so much as a comparison of whether you like 3.5 or Pathfinder or DnD in general.
User avatar
DigitalMage
Banded Mongoose
Posts: 330
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 1:07 pm
Location: UK

Re: So, who bought the RQ6 rules?

Postby DigitalMage » Thu Jul 05, 2012 12:06 pm

danskmacabre wrote:Heh, I meant that more as RQ6 is more of a progression of a set of rules on Legend, as is Pathfinder over 3.5.
Not so much as a comparison of whether you like 3.5 or Pathfinder or DnD in general.
That was actually my point, while improving on some things, PF made some things that worked perfectly well worse, vague or unintuitive (overall I prefer 3.5).

Hopefully RQ6 is only an improvement over Legend :)
User avatar
danskmacabre
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 721
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 6:59 pm
Contact:

Re: So, who bought the RQ6 rules?

Postby danskmacabre » Thu Jul 05, 2012 12:11 pm

DigitalMage wrote: That was actually my point, while improving on some things, PF made some things that worked perfectly well worse, vague or unintuitive (overall I prefer 3.5).
Hopefully RQ6 is only an improvement over Legend :)
Ok well having bought RQ6 yesterday and only from skimming the rules. It looks very good to me.

But like I said earlier, I was just using the 3.5 - Pathfinder example as purely to show that RQ6 is a progression of Legend not something completely different.
It'll be interesting to see how it plays out, which I would like to try with one of my gaming groups soon.

But going back to Pathfinder, I ran it for quite a while and was pretty happy with it. I've never played 3.5 tho so can't compare it to that as from the POV of preferences.
But that part wasn't really the point I was trying to make.
Hopeless
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1158
Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 3:14 pm
Location: UK

Re: So, who bought the RQ6 rules?

Postby Hopeless » Thu Jul 05, 2012 12:17 pm

Is it restricted to Glorantha or expanded to allow say RQ3's setting?
User avatar
danskmacabre
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 721
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 6:59 pm
Contact:

Re: So, who bought the RQ6 rules?

Postby danskmacabre » Thu Jul 05, 2012 12:22 pm

Hopeless wrote:Is it restricted to Glorantha or expanded to allow say RQ3's setting?
There's actually no Glorantha content in it at all.
It's completely setting free, although I expect they will release Glorantha material for RQ6.
User avatar
Da Boss
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 7221
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 5:49 pm
Location: UK

Re: So, who bought the RQ6 rules?

Postby Da Boss » Thu Jul 05, 2012 12:29 pm

so did it sort out the ongoing issues with Legend:

Charging
Combat Styles


what things are different?
User avatar
danskmacabre
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 721
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 6:59 pm
Contact:

Re: So, who bought the RQ6 rules?

Postby danskmacabre » Thu Jul 05, 2012 12:39 pm

Da Boss wrote:so did it sort out the ongoing issues with Legend:
Charging
Combat Styles
what things are different?
IMO Charging still doesn't really make much sense. It's still a full round action which seems stupid to me, well apart form maybe a mounted charge.
So I'll still be using in house ruling for that.
I haven't read the rules in DETAIL yet, so I will stand corrected if someone clarifies it better than I.
But I did read the charging rules specifically as I was interested in their take on it.

There's a loads of differences, but no MAJOR system changes.

Combat styles are more formalised and you can get Combat style "traits" which are a bit like feats. For example there's a Shield wall trait on a Combat style which allows for additional protection is a group of ppl all have that trait.

Combat Manoeuvres are similar but changed and some added.

After I've spent more time reading the rules I'll make a proper post about the differences, although I'm happy to answer specific questions.
User avatar
danskmacabre
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 721
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 6:59 pm
Contact:

Re: So, who bought the RQ6 rules?

Postby danskmacabre » Thu Jul 05, 2012 1:28 pm

Here's a link to a thread on their website describing the differences.
http://www.thedesignmechanism.com/forum ... y-1393448/
User avatar
Loz
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 2087
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 12:34 pm

Re: So, who bought the RQ6 rules?

Postby Loz » Fri Jul 06, 2012 2:46 am

IMO Charging still doesn't really make much sense. It's still a full round action which seems stupid to me, well apart form maybe a mounted charge.
Not sure why it shouldn't make sense or seem stupid. If you're going to gain the benefits of a charge, you need momentum. That requires physical effort and exertion to build. The acceleration needed, especially from a standing start, is going to require a few seconds to build-up, unless you're aided by magic or preternaturally fast. Most combatants are laden-down with armour, weapons, and may even be panting with the exertion of previous rounds of combat. With a combat round lasting 5 seconds, taking a full round to build that momentum and take advantage of the increased damage bonus doesn't seem to be unreasonable.

If there isn't some kind of brake - pun intended - then you're going to have combatants charging on one action, pausing, then charging on the next, all within impossibly low time frames.
What am I supposed to say?
Where are the words to answer you,
When you talk that way?


Rush - Spindrift
User avatar
languagegeek
Mongoose
Posts: 164
Joined: Wed May 26, 2010 6:43 pm
Location: Hamilton, Ontario

Re: So, who bought the RQ6 rules?

Postby languagegeek » Fri Jul 06, 2012 3:05 am

Loz wrote:
IMO Charging still doesn't really make much sense. It's still a full round action which seems stupid to me, well apart form maybe a mounted charge.
Not sure why it shouldn't make sense or seem stupid. If you're going to gain the benefits of a charge, you need momentum. That requires physical effort and exertion to build. The acceleration needed, especially from a standing start, is going to require a few seconds to build-up, unless you're aided by magic or preternaturally fast. Most combatants are laden-down with armour, weapons, and may even be panting with the exertion of previous rounds of combat. With a combat round lasting 5 seconds, taking a full round to build that momentum and take advantage of the increased damage bonus doesn't seem to be unreasonable.
Don't have the PDF in front of me on this computer, but I think in RQ6 any movement will use up a Combat Action. So a charge taking a full round isn't that much more (2-3 CAs).
Heresy is the life of a mythology, and orthodoxy is the death — J. Campbell
User avatar
Loz
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 2087
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 12:34 pm

Re: So, who bought the RQ6 rules?

Postby Loz » Fri Jul 06, 2012 12:48 pm

Hopefully RQ6 is only an improvement over Legend
That was the intention.

MRQII/Legend had an enforced page count and development time that meant a lot of what Pete and I wanted to include just wouldn't fit, or couldn't be thoroughly developed. So, what RQ6 offers, over and above Legend, are numerous refinements, explanations, examples, intricacies and details that build on the basic game.

We've also listened closely to all the feedback MRQII players gave, here on these boards, and have incorporated a lot of that into RQ. I don't think that the metamorphosis of MRQII into Legend really went far enough in that regard.

Might be worth viewing Legend as the foundation, but RQ6 as the intended architecture.

And, of course, the compatibility is naturally very high, so taking chunks of RQ6 and using them in Legend, or even vice-versa, should be a doddle.
What am I supposed to say?
Where are the words to answer you,
When you talk that way?


Rush - Spindrift
User avatar
danskmacabre
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 721
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 6:59 pm
Contact:

Re: So, who bought the RQ6 rules?

Postby danskmacabre » Fri Jul 06, 2012 5:52 pm

Loz wrote:
Not sure why it shouldn't make sense or seem stupid. If you're going to gain the benefits of a charge, you need momentum. That requires physical effort and exertion to build. The acceleration needed, especially from a standing start, is going to require a few seconds to build-up, unless you're aided by magic or preternaturally fast. Most combatants are laden-down with armour, weapons, and may even be panting with the exertion of previous rounds of combat. With a combat round lasting 5 seconds, taking a full round to build that momentum and take advantage of the increased damage bonus doesn't seem to be unreasonable.

If there isn't some kind of brake - pun intended - then you're going to have combatants charging on one action, pausing, then charging on the next, all within impossibly low time frames.
Hi, thanks for answering Loz.
This is my view on the whole charging thing.

Most systems require a run up anyway, I rule that you need at least a 4 square run up to charge (4 metres in MRQ2).
I believe that within a turn you can move up to your full round movement allowance. I.E. a human has a move of 8, so you can integrate 8 metres into all you actions during a turn.
so for example move a couple of metres attack someone (not charge). next CA move a couple of metres again attack someone else etc etc.... Moving up to 8 metres per turn normally.

So assuming that you need a 4 metres run up, as I agree you can't just charge someone right next to them as you quite rightly say you need to build up momentum.
That being the case you would be hard pressed to charge twice in a round anyway, especially as
if you did try to charge someone else say 4 metres away you'd be breaking out of combat possibly and allow others to attack you as you break combat.

Also, is charging really that great in Legend or RQ6. You get to increase you damage modifier by one degree. big deal... with all the negatives that go with charging, it seems hardly much of a benefit to raise your damage modifier by one.

From personal experience in Viking Battle Re-enactment charging into a shield wall can work really well, especially if you're wearing chainmail, helmet, axe/sword shield etc... that's a lot of weight and momentum to have behind you.
If done correctly (and preferably against lightly armored foes) if can punch holes in shield walls allowing your fellow combatants to follow you and break the shield wall further.
Using a "Boarsnout" charge is even more effective (basically several heavily armored people forming a wedge and smashing into a shield wall). at busting shield walls.

Charging a single opponent whilst wearing heavy armor can be devastating. Easily causing knockback, knocking some prone etc.. The rules does reflect this to a degree with the knockback by the amount of damage, but all that momentum should count for something too.

Aside from all that making an attack a full round action really screws up the mechanics of combat.
I could do the following:

1: charge, one attack with jut a benefit of a damage increment (and it's harder to attack in a charge as RQ6 adds a penalty to attack). So I get that 1 charge attack in a round and that it. I can't do ANYTHING else. no parry, no evade anything..

2: Alternatively, I can use all my CAs to get multiple attacks/parries, the net result is potentially a LOT more damage and I get to defend myself as well.

I've never liked the charging rules in MRQ2/Legend and now in RQ6. It seems even less reason to ever use it in RQ6 with the additional penalties.

On top of that, if the charge is a full round action and everyone else around me gets all their CAs, where am I whilst they fire off their actions for their CAs? am I just standing there once I charge?

I know charging has been discussed to death on these forums and I don't believe RQ6 has improved it at all.
Still it's easy enough to house rule whatever the case and I DO really like RQ6 (it's well worth a purchase). It's a real gold mine of information and improvements on Legend, I just don't like how the charge rules were implemented.
User avatar
danskmacabre
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 721
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 6:59 pm
Contact:

Re: So, who bought the RQ6 rules?

Postby danskmacabre » Fri Jul 06, 2012 5:53 pm

languagegeek wrote:Don't have the PDF in front of me on this computer, but I think in RQ6 any movement will use up a Combat Action. So a charge taking a full round isn't that much more (2-3 CAs).
you can integrate up to your normal movement rate into other actions if you want...
Or as a full round action move in multiples of your movement rate (like running sprinting etc).
User avatar
Loz
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 2087
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 12:34 pm

Re: So, who bought the RQ6 rules?

Postby Loz » Sat Jul 07, 2012 10:49 pm

Just on the subject of charging - and this will be the last I say on it on this forum, certainly - there are a few things worth pointing out.

The charging rules require that the person charging has moved at a run or sprint for a round prior to contact - which is not the same thing as a full round action - especially when looking at the movement rules in the RQ6 appendices. Secondly charging combatants usually use passive blocking and/or heavy armour as their defence whilst running or sprinting as its almost impossible to actively defend at a full run. Thirdly, unless the recipients of the charge use their one action to actively defend (instead of evading or stabbing the incoming attacker) then there will be an automatic Special Effect, meaning the charger could select Bash Opponent, which with a shield (ramped up one step plus any Damage Bonus), will likely force the recipient back at least several metres and has the potential knock them over too. So break-throughs are easily simulated with the RAW.

What frequently happens in heavy battles, where charges are concerned are:

1. The chargers stay out of contact until the charge occurs (i.e. taking infinite time in combat rounds to set themselves up) protected by either distance or by being screened by a line of skirmishers ahead of them.

2. The charging line takes at least a round of running to generate enough impact to have any effect, assuming they started from stationary.

3. The chargers simply raise their shield, brace their shoulder into it and run blind into the defenders (no parries or even attempts to hit in most cases). Indeed, save for body checks, its near impossible to strike at a target with a weapon whilst simultaneously running. Most people come to a stop first, then swing.

4. The defenders don't automatically buckle. It depends if they brace to recieve the charge and/or have superior numbers. Charging a thin, single person line is not the same as hitting a formation two or more ranks deep.

5. No other charges take place for the remainder or the battle or skirmish unless the surviving chargers retreat out of engagement range and spend upwards of a minute to reorganise themselves for the next charge. Something which can only be done if they have a seperate screening unit to block the follow-up, or the defenders decide to remain in place.

Generally there isn't space or distance to charge in a melee. It takes space and time to prepare and execute it. Spending a round of running, prior to contact, isn't a disadvantage since the targets of the charge can't do anything to the attacker except brace for impact... unless of course you are running straight at a line of prepared ranged weapon users - at which point you deserve everything you're going to get...
Also, is charging really that great in Legend or RQ6. You get to increase you damage modifier by one degree. big deal... with all the negatives that go with charging, it seems hardly much of a benefit to raise your damage modifier by one.
Well, the universal rule of battle is you don't charge your opponent unless you absolutely must. You only perform charges to either cross interposing distance quickly, if faced by missile fire, or to break up an otherwise solid enemy formation. Foot charges usually result in slaughter if they don't overwhelm the enemy; they're risky and break up your own formation (if you even had one). See Celtic or Germanic charges against Roman Legions, or Zulus against the British Army, for evidence of how badly wrong they can go. I think you've also forgotten that the Size of a weapon is increased by one step during a charge. That might not seem like much, but its nothing to be sneered at especially if using a huge shield.
What am I supposed to say?
Where are the words to answer you,
When you talk that way?


Rush - Spindrift
rust
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 5941
Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2008 10:17 pm
Location: Sonthofen / Germany

Re: So, who bought the RQ6 rules?

Postby rust » Sat Jul 07, 2012 11:19 pm

A good historical example is the "Verlorener Haufen" (= approximately
"lost bunch") of the Renaissance, the unit with the task to charge for-
mations in order to break them up for the attack of the main force. Its
members earned double pay, but this was usually not enough to recruit
a sufficient unit, so soldiers sentenced to death were added, with a pro-
mise to be set free if they survived the battle - which they only rarely
did, because in most cases the charging "Verlorener Haufen" was indeed
lost. Being a "charger" and serving under the red "Blutfahne" (= "blood
flag") of the army's "Verlorener Haufen" was by far the most dangerous,
almost suicidal job a soldier could get.
User avatar
Vile
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 741
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 10:01 am
Location: The Maze of Peril
Contact:

Re: So, who bought the RQ6 rules?

Postby Vile » Sun Jul 08, 2012 3:52 am

Well, I put my money down for the pre-order and so far, reading through the free PDF that comes with it, I am not regretting my decision. :mrgreen:
Prime_Evil
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 1521
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2005 3:41 am

Re: So, who bought the RQ6 rules?

Postby Prime_Evil » Sun Jul 08, 2012 8:48 am

I'm still working my way through the RQ 6 PDF, but it's an excellent product so far. It's awesome to see what Loz and Pete have done with the system.
RangerDan
Mongoose
Posts: 170
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 11:16 am
Location: Poland

Re: So, who bought the RQ6 rules?

Postby RangerDan » Sun Jul 08, 2012 10:47 am

I also bought the RQ6 Print+PDF combo, and while I wait for the physical version, I've spent quite some time going over the PDF.

As other have pointed out there are a large number of tweaks made to the system, I'll go over some that made an impression with me.

Combat is mostly the same, with some more space dedicated to defining which actions are proactive (can be done only on your turn) or reactive (can be done any time in reaction to something else). A new option has been given for using your weapon or shield as a form of passive cover, which is a great addition in my opinion.

* The weirdness of ranged combat in combination with Choose Location has been addressed in a very satisfactory way.

* Combat Maneuvers in general have been expanded and add many tactical options. I'm not impressed by their new name though ("Special Effects").

The Magic chapters have received a lot of love, and some of the best changes are here. There is something like 9 pages on GM advice on tailoring the magic rules to what is needed for your particular game-world.

* Common Magic has been weakened and simplified to make it really Folk Magic, which I find more evocative of hedge wizards and wise-women. No more Amplify Common Magic cheese.

* Spirit Magic is a nice long chapter containing similar content to the Legend spirit magic rules + the spirit magic web enhancement.

* Divine Magic has been changed significantly - no more sacrifices of POW! Instead, dedicated worshippers have a pool of 'Divine Magic Points' to fuel their spells. How does this pool get refilled? Worship, of course. There's more to it that this, and I like it as an option. I could even see myself using both types of Divine Magic in my game - "worship-magic" for actual gods, POW-sacrifice for demonic pacts... or something like that.

* Sorcery is mechanically similar, though many spells are new.

* Mysticism is a new type of magic that reminds me of wuxia Kung-Fu types of characters.

My general impression is that RQ6 is somewhat crunchier than MRQ2, requiring both more tables to refer to and more head-math. This may or may not be an issue to some; I for one will prepare some 'cheat-sheets' I think.

Overall I am very pleased with my purchase. I would say the level of compatibility with my various MRQ2 and Legend products is extremely high, and I wil likely cross-utilise them a lot.

As a final thought, the PDF is very sensibly laid out, and well bookmarked.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests