Alternatives rules proposal

[Arasmo]

Hello, I'm a young french fan of Runequest. I quite like this new edition, but like most GM, i just had to change a few rules and i would love to know what you think about them.

-level of success :
taken from Warhammer RPG
If you succeeded your test, add 1 level of success per full 10% range between your roll and your competence value.
Example: your boating skill is at 48%. You roll a 7%. Between 7 et 48%, there are 3 full 10% ranges. So that makes a level of success of 3.

-I also added a new characteristic ,Speed, in order to limit the importance of Dexterity.
It is used exclusively to calculate mouvement and combat actions.

-Finally, I decided to change the calculation of combat actions.
Speed 1-6 : 1 CA or 1 Reaction
Speed 7-9 : 1 CA and 1 reaction
Speed 10-13 : 1 CA and 2 Reactions
Speed 14-17 : 2 CA et 2 Reactions
Speed 18-21 : 2 CA et 3 reactions
and so on...
I feel it adds more granularity to the original method of calculation.

 

[Rasta]

Interesting rules. What is your application of "levels of success"? Are they just used in opposed rolls, or how do you use them?

It seems that adding a speed characteristic kind of adds a redundancy to the rules, and breaks down certian mechanics.

With this system, there is no distiction between speed (how fast you move) and dexterity (quickness)

Think about a squirrel as an example. They may not be fast in all out speed. (you would probably be able to run 100m in a straight line faster than a squirrel could) But they are extremely quick and almost imposible to catch due to their high "DEX".

Horses are another example that would have a high speed, but not necessarily have high dex.

I see the most problems for someone wanting to play a halfling character. They have a high Dex offering more CA, but are extremely slow. This mechanic would make playing halfling even more undesireable.

But for your game, do whatever is fun.

 

[Arasmo]

I use the "level of success" to determine how successful is an action, with a bit more precision than the usual "normal success- critic". It can be used in opposed rolls or normal rolls : for some actions, it handy to know if you just succeeded by an inch or did so with ease.

Well, with my rules, dexterity is more related to coordination than speed.
So there is a distinction. Dexterity is used for all actions that requires a lot of ability and coordination,and so influences a lot of competences speed is used merely to determine how fast you are, so it influences mouvement, initiative ( Speed +INT insteand of DEX+ INT) and combat actions.

 

[Rasta]

I use the "level of success" to determine how successful is an action, with a bit more precision than the usual "normal success- critic". It can be used in opposed rolls or normal rolls : for some actions, it handy to know if you just succeeded by an inch or did so with ease.

Cool. I can see how that would be useful. I use a system simular to that, but just use the number they rolled subtracted from the skill to determine how successful. I think they work pretty simularly.

Well, with my rules, dexterity is more related to coordination than speed.
So there is a distinction.

Right. I was talking about a distinction between quickness and speed. With your mechanics, it's impossible to have someone who is really fast but not that quick, as they are not the same thing. (ie horse & squirrel)

How does this mechanic apply to flying creatures with variable "speed"? Do they get more combat actions when flying? Then less CA's when they land on the ground?

Casting mobility spells increases SR?

 

[Arasmo]

Cool. I can see how that would be useful. I use a system simular to that, but just use the number they rolled subtracted from the skill to determine how successful. I think they work pretty simularly.

They do in deed; I just find it easier and quicker to do it my way, as I'm pretty crap in mental calculations.

How does this mechanic apply to flying creatures with variable "speed"? Do they get more combat actions when flying? Then less CA's when they land on the ground?

Never thought of that, but i'd say they get less actions when they fight on ground (-50% SR and CA or something like that, depending on the creature)

Right. I was talking about a distinction between quickness and speed. With your mechanics, it's impossible to have someone who is really fast but not that quick, as they are not the same thing. (ie horse & squirrel)

sorry, i thought quickness and speed were more or less the same thing...
Just checked the dictionnary and there is indeed some difference.
Well, you're right, it doesn't make the distinction. But then, the official Runequest Rules don't either, as far as i know.
The addition of speed is just a attempt to address the issue of the overwhelming importance of dexterity. But i suppose the attempt does raise issues of it's own...
Thanks for the feedback!

 

[frogspawner]

-I also added a new characteristic ,Speed, in order to limit the importance of Dexterity.
It is used exclusively to calculate mouvement and combat actions.

I agree that Dexterity is too important if it gives extra Combat Actions. But using Speed instead seems to introduce more trouble.

To solve the problem I suggest limiting the importance of CA's themselves: allow only 1 attack action per round (which may be split, as per RQ2/3) and other actions can be used only for movement, etc and extra parry/dodging.

 

[BlueCorpse]

Instead of basing CA on DEX why not base it on experience level.

Novice 1
Seasoned 2
Veteran 3
Master 4
Hero 5

 

[Rasta]

Personally I give each player 2 combat actions and 2 reactions per round. If they have two weapons, or a weapon and a shield, they only gain an extra reaction. Which can still be used for a free attack. Should someone open themselves up. This takes away the importance of Dex on CA's. We tried it out last gaming session, and it works pretty well.

 

[Rasta]

sorry, i thought quickness and speed were more or less the same thing...
Just checked the dictionnary and there is indeed some difference.
Well, you're right, it doesn't make the distinction. But then, the official Runequest Rules don't either, as far as i know.

I hope I'm not coming off as a dick. But I do think the current rules do allow for such an outcome. Take a duck for example. They are slow in speed only moving 3 meters per CA. (As opposed to a human 4 meters) But they have on average a higher DEX than humans do. Which affects their quickness (SR & CA)

I do agree that the current rules do put an overemphisis on DEX.

 

[Mugen]

-level of success :
taken from Warhammer RPG
If you succeeded your test, add 1 level of success per full 10% range between your roll and your competence value.
Example: your boating skill is at 48%. You roll a 7%. Between 7 et 48%, there are 3 full 10% ranges. So that makes a level of success of 3.

Why not simply use the 10s of the d100 roll, adding 1 LoS for each 10% above 100 ?

Statistically it is not very different, and it get rids of unnecessary maths. Not that it's very difficult to make a substraction and a division by 10, but if 2 solutions give identical results, I prefer using the easiest one.

I actually plan to use it, with a little tweak : if the d100 roll is under skill/10, treat the 10s result as a 10.

 

[Arasmo]

I hope I'm not coming off as a dick

Hey, don't worry, if I posted my proposal, it was precisely to check if they were actually decent alternatives or not.
I think I'll drop the Speed caracteristic altogether and will resort to your idea of 2 CA and reactions per round.