Any change to the Experience system?

[atgxtg]

It almost seems that they've moved more towards the HW/HQ system of awarding points -- I wonder MQ has cost multipliers. (such as 2x for trying to improve a skill you didn't use this session).

It seems to me they are going towards the HQ/HW system for other things too. For example, combat rolls are now roll under you skill, low roll wins.

Throw in masteries, and it is the HQ resolution system.

 

[atgxtg]

"I see a merchant? I jump over to him, speak Oogally-boogally, then stand on my hands and haggle over the price of horses."

Heh. To which, as the GM, I would say "Fine, you do so. Of course, none of this is in a stressful or even demanding situation, so no skill checks, but you neatly clear the hedge, ask him if he knows where the library is, impress him with your acrobatics, and then buy a mule for 25 lunars."

I never really found 'skill hunting' to be a major problem in that regard. If a PC wanted to raise some of those obscure skills that he never much used, then the RQIII rules on training and research were more than adequate, IMHO.

I agree. IF a GM was running the imrpovement system by the book, skill check hunting was never a problem. If someone wanted to go around jumping. that would eseentially be self-training. Now if they wanted to jump across a chasm, they would earn a skill check!

Likewise, I hear lots of stories about peole switching weapons in combat to get multiple experience checks. To me, that is just suicidal.Going from your 80% weapon to your 20% weapon might get you another check, but it gives your opponenent another four rounds or so to kill you. Most of my players would rather just cough up the money for training.

 

[waiwode]

I agree. IF a GM was running the imrpovement system by the book, skill check hunting was never a problem. If someone wanted to go around jumping. that would eseentially be self-training. Now if they wanted to jump across a chasm, they would earn a skill check!

Likewise, I hear lots of stories about peole switching weapons in combat to get multiple experience checks. To me, that is just suicidal.Going from your 80% weapon to your 20% weapon might get you another check, but it gives your opponenent another four rounds or so to kill you. Most of my players would rather just cough up the money for training.

Shmeh. It was a random example of Check Hunting, not a specific one.

Well, arguably the character should still get a Fast Talk check for haggling ... after all, Master Merchants and Priests of Issaries don't have to fend of a Walkapus to be able to rook 25L out of you for a spavined mule.

I'd see weapon changing occur a lot with starting characters ... it wasn't too uncommon for an RQIII character outside of a martial background (warrior, noble, soldier) to have two weapons within about 10% of each other.

When you're dealing with 45% and 40%, the chance to get two checks in the combat seems a lot more germaine than when you're dealing with an 80%/20% split.

Doug.

 

[Mikko Leho]

One of the defining points of RQ that I really liked was the very fact that you didn't get good at skills if you never used them.

You weren't rewarded for using your skills but for succeeding in using one's skills. According to the original rules one couldn't learn from failures. Some have solved this by allowing skill improvement rolls for failures, which happens too often in my opinion. Leaving skill checks for the GM's consideration is even worse. RQ's experience system needed fixing, but I am not yet sure if MRQ's solution is better given the little we know.

 

[MongooseMatt]

True. One of the defining points of RQ that I really liked was the very fact that you didn't get good at skills if you never used them.

You can still have it that way - all it requires is a limitation to raise skills that were used. The mechanic is different, but the effect the same, if desired.

 

[SteveMND]

You can still have it that way - all it requires is a limitation to raise skills that were used. The mechanic is different, but the effect the same, if desired.

True, it doesn't look all that hard to house-rule it if preferred. It's just that, well, like I said before... one preview comes out, a change I love. Another comes out, a change I hate. Rinse and repeat.

 

[waiwode]

True. One of the defining points of RQ that I really liked was the very fact that you didn't get good at skills if you never used them.

You can still have it that way - all it requires is a limitation to raise skills that were used. The mechanic is different, but the effect the same, if desired.

I, for one, look forward to getting my hands on this. I'm impressed at how many of what I saw as the little problems with a twenty-year-old+ game I always loved have been addressed in a way that makes the system feel modernized, or even streamlined.

With the freedom to say you may improve any skill you attempted to use this session, pass or fail and a half-way decent training mechanic for when you really have to learn how to speak Oogally-boogally or sail a boat during "down time" we're left with a system that allows the players to concentrate their skill checks where they want to develop the character they want.

Now all I have to do is shake some of my players free of their irrational fear of percentile rolls.

Doug.

 

[burdock]

For example, combat rolls are now roll under you skill, low roll wins.

In Runequest we have always had to roll under the skill-value to succeed in the skill.

 

[atgxtg]

For example, combat rolls are now roll under you skill, low roll wins.

In Runequest we have always had to roll under the skill-value to succeed in the skill.

Yes, but we didn't have the lowest roll wins. From what I've read on the "open Day" thread, you roll angainst your oppnenet and the lowest roll wins, assuming that it below your skill chance.

For example, Say you have an experienced warrior fighting a trollkin. THe specierence warrior is at 75% with his sword & shield, while the Trollkin is at 25%

If the Trollkin attacks and rolls a 23% for a success, and the warrior rolls a 35%, the Trollkin rolled lower and so appears to "win" in MRQ. I don't know if this means a special success vs. a normal parry or what, but that is certainly differenet than in previous edtions of RQ. Very much like HeroQuest.

 

[waiwode]

For example, combat rolls are now roll under you skill, low roll wins.

In Runequest we have always had to roll under the skill-value to succeed in the skill.

However in RQ III, if you and your opponent both have Hurt Target 50% and Avoid Opponent's Attack 50% ... if you rolled 29% you Hurt, however if they rolled 49% they avoided, and took no hurt.

I think what this is saying is that if you roll 29% to Hurt now, your opponent doesn't just have to roll under 50%, they have to roll under 29% to avoid being hurt. (I don't know who wins ties).

First each party needs to succeed on the roll. Then each party needs to roll lower than their opponent. That's how I read it, anyway.

Edit: Curse atgxtg! His fingers are 1 minute faster than mine!

Doug.

 

[Urox]

I think what this is saying is that if you roll 29% to Hurt now, your opponent doesn't just have to roll under 50%, they have to roll under 29% to avoid being hurt. (I don't know who wins ties).

My initial reaction to this is that it's messed up (although I need to give it more thought).

If I read this right, say a lowly Trollkin with 10% Throw Rock attacks a Rune Lord with 95% Dodge.

If the Trollkin manages to hit, the Rune Lord will have < 10% chance of Dodging?

 

[waiwode]

I think what this is saying is that if you roll 29% to Hurt now, your opponent doesn't just have to roll under 50%, they have to roll under 29% to avoid being hurt. (I don't know who wins ties).

My initial reaction to this is that it's messed up (although I need to give it more thought).

If I read this right, say a lowly Trollkin with 10% Throw Rock attacks a Rune Lord with 95% Dodge.

If the Trollkin manages to hit, the Rune Lord will have < 10% chance of Dodging?

If the Trollkin manages to hit, doesn't he deserve a chance to actually hit? Because with scores this disparate the Trollkin might as well be throwing rocks at his own skull in old RQ.

I'm not sure how this is going to work in practice, I think it will have a somewhat levelling effect on high percentiles, and will favour the "attacker" in most situations.

I think I'd be a little happier if it was a HeroQuest/HarnMaster-like arrangement, where Crit Success, Success, Failure, & Critical Failure are compared. I'll have to wait and see how it plays out.

Of course one could always try it the other way, and favour high rolls. If the Trollkin rolls 9% the Rune Lord has to roll 10% up to 95%. This favours the character with the higher skill, but still inflicts a penalty on their roll based on the degree of success (ie, the height of the roll) of the attacker.

Doug.

 

[atgxtg]

Edit: Curse atgxtg! His fingers are 1 minute faster than mine!

Doug.

Hurray! All that time working on circuit boards finally pay off. Now it I can just translate that over to the Stratocaster...

 

[atgxtg]

I think what this is saying is that if you roll 29% to Hurt now, your opponent doesn't just have to roll under 50%, they have to roll under 29% to avoid being hurt. (I don't know who wins ties).

My initial reaction to this is that it's messed up (although I need to give it more thought).

If I read this right, say a lowly Trollkin with 10% Throw Rock attacks a Rune Lord with 95% Dodge.

If the Trollkin manages to hit, the Rune Lord will have < 10% chance of Dodging?

If the Trollkin manages to hit, doesn't he deserve a chance to actually hit? Because with scores this disparate the Trollkin might as well be throwing rocks at his own skull in old RQ.

I'm not sure how this is going to work in practice, I think it will have a somewhat levelling effect on high percentiles, and will favour the "attacker" in most situations.

I think I'd be a little happier if it was a HeroQuest/HarnMaster-like arrangement, where Crit Success, Success, Failure, & Critical Failure are compared. I'll have to wait and see how it plays out.

Of course one could always try it the other way, and favour high rolls. If the Trollkin rolls 9% the Rune Lord has to roll 10% up to 95%. This favours the character with the higher skill, but still inflicts a penalty on their roll based on the degree of success (ie, the height of the roll) of the attacker.

Doug.

Well, HQ sort of offsset this with the "bumb for masteries rules" Essentially, your success level was "bumped" up from falure to success and so forth for having masteries. You could also bump the results with Hero Points.

IF MRQ has something like this, with a mastery every 40-50% then the 95% Rune Lord will do alright, although the Trollkin might be worse off than with a straight dodge roll.

Personally, I accepted this sort of resultion in HQ, but I don't like it in RQ. I mean, it is probably a "make it or break it" point for me. [/i]

 

[HyrumOWC]

That's not the way it works.

Essentially, MRQ is what's known as a "blackjack" system. In an opposed check, whoever rolls highest, without going over their skill, wins.

The only time whoever rolls lowest comes in is when both characters fail.

In the case of the Trollkin vs. Rune Lord, the Trollkin is toast. The Trollkin needs to roll 10% or lower, with 10% being ideal outside of a crit (which happens if he rolls 01). However, the Rune Lord wins if he rolls 11-95, and crits on 01-09. (Could be 01-10, I'm not clear on rounding.)

However, if the Trollkin rolls 11-95, and the Rune Lord rolls 96-00, the Trollkin wins.

Chances are the Trollkin is paste once the rock goes flying past the head of the Rune Lord.

Hyrum.

 

[wartorn]

If the Trollkin manages to hit, doesn't he deserve a chance to actually hit? Because with scores this disparate the Trollkin might as well be throwing rocks at his own skull in old RQ.

This is what RQ 3 special / critical hits are for - you needed a special success on defense to avoid a special success on attack.

Edit: Hyrum ftw!

 

[Urox]

If I read this right, say a lowly Trollkin with 10% Throw Rock attacks a Rune Lord with 95% Dodge.

If the Trollkin manages to hit, the Rune Lord will have < 10% chance of Dodging?

If the Trollkin manages to hit, doesn't he deserve a chance to actually hit? Because with scores this disparate the Trollkin might as well be throwing rocks at his own skull in old RQ.

I'm not sure how this is going to work in practice, I think it will have a somewhat levelling effect on high percentiles, and will favour the "attacker" in most situations.

But, say you're that 95% Rune Lord -- would you rather fight another Rune Lord, or a band of ten 10% Trollkin?

I haven't crunched the numbers, but I think that if what was presented earlier is true, this seems really skewwed towards multiple opponents with the same total skill vs a single combantant.

Say it's that Rune Lord against two vicious Broos with 50% -- again, the 95% defensive skill has been lowered to 50% -- this doesn't seem right -- shouldn't someone as heroic as a Rune Lord be able to trounce those Broos isntead of having to possibly run from them?

RuneQuest combat has always been lethal, but not this lethal...

 

[atgxtg]

That's not the way it works.

Essentially, MRQ is what's known as a "blackjack" system. In an opposed check, whoever rolls highest, without going over their skill, wins.

The only time whoever rolls lowest comes in is when both characters fail.

In the case of the Trollkin vs. Rune Lord, the Trollkin is toast. The Trollkin needs to roll 10% or lower, with 10% being ideal outside of a crit (which happens if he rolls 01). However, the Rune Lord wins if he rolls 11-95, and crits on 01-09. (Could be 01-10, I'm not clear on rounding.)

However, if the Trollkin rolls 11-95, and the Rune Lord rolls 96-00, the Trollkin wins.

Chances are the Trollkin is paste once the rock goes flying past the head of the Rune Lord.

Hyrum.

Oh, the PENDRAGON method. We could just use Pendragon Pass for that.
:roll:

If that's the case, then MRQ does not play like RQ at all! :evil:

 

[GbajiTheDeceiver]

Chances are the Trollkin is paste once the rock goes flying past the head of the Rune Lord.

Which is as it should be.

If a system is rebalanced so that someone with a lower skill has more of a chance against someone with a higher skill, well what's the point in having a high skill?

 

[wartorn]

Oh, the PENDRAGON method. We could just use Pendragon Pass for that.
:roll:

If that's the case, then MRQ does not play like RQ at all! :evil:

Genuine Question -> What's wrong with this method?

I'd guess it makes high skill very valuable , perhaps even untouchable - but this makes Conan types very feasible with this system.