Armour skill penalty

[atgxtg]

in my experince the balancing does not work by changing the rules but limiting the amout of magic. And with this Rune Magic thing and integrating runes in order to get spells and when cults limit the power of those, magic (at least powerful magic) is not by far as common as in previous versions

We don't know if that is the case for Gloantha though. THe core book is set up as a generic RPG-not a Gloanthan one. Rune Magic-the real Rune Magic that people think of when they see a priest casting a spell, hasn't been released yet.

We don't really know what the magic for Gloantha will end up like. If they tone that down, I think the GLorantha fans will not like it.

 

[Hoitsu]

I meant core books Rune magic, not the Companions Divine magic. Rune magic in core book is the former Spirit magic which was the common form of magic in old versions, magic that almost every one know. But this Rune magic in core book is going to be that form of magic in Glorantha and it is not nearly that common as Spirit magic was, because of the restrictions.
And what i meant about the "limiting magic" part, was that how much and how easily your players get magic in your games. If you limit the amount and power of spells this game is more balanced. If you allow people to get that Badesharp-6 easily, then it is not balanced. In former versions , it was easy to get magic but in MRQ it is not so. You need to get runes, integrate them with succesfull precence check, spend 1 point POW/ rune and then you can learn spells. Most characters will not have high Presence so there will be a lot of failing in that skill check. Tehn you need to find another rune in order to integrate it. More over cult restrict the magnitude of spells and because of the cult society, that probably means it is very, very hard to find a teacher that teaches you the spell with out the cults approval. Thats why it is not meant that everyone have that Bladesharp-3 or bludgeon-3 and the rules are made supporting this suggest.

 

[gamesmeister]

Also, because ignore armor is so powerful, Strike Weapon has not gotten a lot of attention. A greatsword with a few points of Bladesharp is a weapon destroying machine, often breaking spears in one attack and just about any weapon in two.

Don't have a problem with that tbh. You can still parry with a shield even if your opponent attempts a precise shot on your spear. Only if you miss your parry will he damage your spear, and to be quite honest, I would *expect* a spear to shatter pretty quickly when hit repeatedly with a greatsword.

Gerry

But would you expect another greastowrd to shatter so easily? Most of the time they will go to pieces in two hits.

Well that means you've failed to parry with your greatsword. So rather than you deflecting the blow, he's hit your sword square on. Yes, I'd expect that to shatter too...

 

[atgxtg]

Don't have a problem with that tbh. You can still parry with a shield even if your opponent attempts a precise shot on your spear. Only if you miss your parry will he damage your spear, and to be quite honest, I would *expect* a spear to shatter pretty quickly when hit repeatedly with a greatsword.

Gerry

But would you expect another greastowrd to shatter so easily? Most of the time they will go to pieces in two hits.

Well that means you've failed to parry with your greatsword. So rather than you deflecting the blow, he's hit your sword square on. Yes, I'd expect that to shatter too...

Too points:

1) Even if you make your parry, the greatsword is only soaking up damage based on it's 4 AP. So making the parry roll has no effect on the sword breaking.

2) I own a two handed sword. It would be practically impossible to breakit by hitting it with another sword while I was holding it. My hands wound move or I'd drop the thing first. Now if you laid the thing down on two stacks on cinderblocks and hit it with another two handed, it might breat, but noiot easily. It would probably bend or chip long before it would break, and it would mostly likely ruin the other sword in the process.

 

[atgxtg]

I meant core books Rune magic, not the Companions Divine magic. Rune magic in core book is the former Spirit magic which was the common form of magic in old versions, magic that almost every one know. But this Rune magic in core book is going to be that form of magic in Glorantha and it is not nearly that common as Spirit magic was, because of the restrictions.
And what i meant about the "limiting magic" part, was that how much and how easily your players get magic in your games. If you limit the amount and power of spells this game is more balanced. If you allow people to get that Badesharp-6 easily, then it is not balanced. In former versions , it was easy to get magic but in MRQ it is not so. You need to get runes, integrate them with succesfull precence check, spend 1 point POW/ rune and then you can learn spells. Most characters will not have high Presence so there will be a lot of failing in that skill check. Tehn you need to find another rune in order to integrate it. More over cult restrict the magnitude of spells and because of the cult society, that probably means it is very, very hard to find a teacher that teaches you the spell with out the cults approval. Thats why it is not meant that everyone have that Bladesharp-3 or bludgeon-3 and the rules are made supporting this suggest.

But you are assuming that runes are rare-or that there isn't another way to get rune magic in Glorantha. Look how common bronze in in Glorantha, and that comes from the bones of gods. Blood probably isn't that rare.

Secondly, since the runes grant the pwer to cast spells and the runes come from the gods, and the gods are the owners of the runes, wouldn't those same god be able to impart that power onto others?

For instance, since Olranth is the owner of the Air, Motion, and Mastery runes, he is probably capable of passing on the power of those runes to his worhsippers.

 

[Gnarsh]

Almost every one here uses frases like "when using bladesharp" or "if you have Protection" and so on.
Of course it is the very soul of magic to make people more powerful and it has nothing to do with real life stuff. Like that Greatsword thing, it shatters with two strikes, of course if you use magic. It seems to shatter easily even with out it but PLEASE sont bring the magic when talking about some spesific rules. Magic changes all, remember that. Of course a guy with Bladesharp-4 do damage and hes precise attack is deadly. Why even bother to use it because you can kill your opponent even with normal attacks with that Bladesharp?
The question seems to be more like how much magic you are willing to give to your players? do they all have that Bladesharp-6 and Protection-6 and so on? or is that just in rare occasions? Think about the balance in your games...it helps to solve many of your "rule problems"

Actually. That's not really accurate. The problem isn't with the amount of magic, but that due to the way precise-strike works, some spells are inherently more powerful then others.

A bladesharp should be roughly equivalent in power to a protection, right? They both do opposing things, and point for point should be equivalent. But what happens if you have a character with a bladesharp 8 fighting an opponent with a protection 8? Well. The bladesharp8 just made a precise strike *free*. Both now have the same exact skill, but the bladesharp 8 guy will not only get a precise shot at full skill, but his opponents protection 8 spell will be utterly worthless to him...


That's a gaping balance flaw. And it really doesn't matter how prevalent magic is (unless you just take it out entirely). Every point of bladesharp will be more effective then every point of protection for exactly this reason. In older games, they were roughly equivalent simply because the skill points didn't matter that much (unless you were under 100% of course). They certainly didn't just erase points of armor.

Heck. In RQ3, the shimmer spell used to actually reduce opposing fighters attack skill. That would have made it useful against precise strikes (and other special combat abilities). However, in MRQ they changed it to something that increases your dodge instead. Hrmmm...


Actually. The biggest problem I can see right off the bat is that you gain benefits for having attacks over 100%, but nothing for having defensive abilities over 100%. More correctly, there are things you can blow skill points on when attacking, but not when defending. Now, if you put the equivalent abilities into dodge and parry, you *might* bring the whole mess into balance, but honestly you're starting to get into a more complex combat system then I think most people want to play...


What I would do, at least for precise strikes, is make them skills you can only use if you have that many points over 100% to blow on the attempt. The assumtion being that someone below 100% isn't skilled enough to do stuff like that to start with. Secondly, I'd implement a rule I already use in RQ. That opposing combat skill over 100% can be used to subtract from both if you want. So having a dodge of 150% would allow you to subtract 50% from the other guys attack. If he's still got 140% or higher, then he may choose to spend points on a precise strike. Finally, simply make a rule that only natural skill can be used in this manner. So points of bladesharp, while helping you out when under 100%, only help you with your crit chance when you're above that level (although you still get the extra damage, and it'll protect you from subtraction from a higher skilled defender).

You might also just combine aimed blow and ignore armor abilities into one, including the "if he misses his defensive skill, ignore armor" into the deal. So if you have 140% of natural skill available, you can blow 40% to hit a hit location of your choosing. If the opponent also misses his parry or dodge, you get to ignore the armor on that location as well (or half armor perhaps?).

What this does is allow someone significantly higher skilled to blow through people no matter how well armored (The 200% guy against a 50% guy will reduce his parry to nothing and still have points left over to aim for the head for example). But it prevents this effect from dominating fights between foes of equivalent skill level.

Dunno. Seems like a more "heroic" process. If you're close to the same skill level as the other guy, he's not going to be pulling any trick moves on you. Which seems about right IMO.

 

[atgxtg]

A long time ago I started a thread for precise parries. Basically things for people with defense skills to do, just like precise attacks.

I still thaink that that would be a good idea. Stuff from a parry that stops more (or all) damage, or perhaps a parry that doesn't use up a reaction, or a dodge that sidesteps and moves the character into an advatageous postion. Lots of possiblities.

 

[Hoitsu]

For Gnarsh,

I had a suggestion of that precise attack thing somewhere in this thread. If you make a succesfull parry (meaning some amount of damage is going to be subtracted from the attack) against an armor ignoring precise attack, The armor protects normally. If the attack is not parried in anyway, the precise attack ignores armor totally. Of course again the guy with the Bladesharp-8 is going to mass-murder everybody, but the guy with the Protection-8 is going to be holding on as long as the shield and weapons holds. And what is with magical armor, i would suggest that it cant be bypassed at all (or maybe only half of it).

Just a few suggestions to improve the game

 

[gamesmeister]

1) Even if you make your parry, the greatsword is only soaking up damage based on it's 4 AP. So making the parry roll has no effect on the sword breaking.

Well, it has some effect, depending on the rolls...it's still absorbing 4 damage.

Regardless, use Dodge instead of Parry and your sword will take virtually no damage. :roll:

2) I own a two handed sword. It would be practically impossible to breakit by hitting it with another sword while I was holding it. My hands wound move or I'd drop the thing first. Now if you laid the thing down on two stacks on cinderblocks and hit it with another two handed, it might breat, but noiot easily. It would probably bend or chip long before it would break, and it would mostly likely ruin the other sword in the process.

And bending or chipping wouldn't make it practically useless in a swordfight, other than as a club?

You are over analysing now - this isn't supposed to be a simulation to the nth degree.

 

[simonh]

in my experince the balancing does not work by changing the rules but limiting the amout of magic. And with this Rune Magic thing and integrating runes in order to get spells and when cults limit the power of those, magic (at least powerful magic) is not by far as common as in previous versions

Mongoose expect that almost every character will eventualy have some runes integrated, and therefore have some magic. Look at the rules for more experienced characters. Even characters only a little more experienced than starting characters ALL start with several integrated runes.

Cults actualy make getting magic much easier, not harder. If you are a member of a cult, learning magic from them is at half normal price. Also they do not limit how many points you can learn - they give automatic access to spells up to 2 or 4 points, but don't stop you learning more than that if you want.

 

[GoingDown]

Reading this thread over and over again - and I just realized I don't want to go with anything too complicated.

So, I will keep armour penalties just as on the book, but I will use skill halving for precise attacks. This way it is under control.

 

[Deleriad]

Reading this thread over and over again - and I just realized I don't want to go with anything too complicated.

So, I will keep armour penalties just as on the book, but I will use skill halving for precise attacks. This way it is under control.

I'm going to be using the -40% to bypass armor option but make it a legendary ability instead and one which you learn only with the weapon you've mastered. And I'm not going to allow it for bashing weapons and probably not for 2H slashing weapons.

• "Gorbag takes -40% to skillfully bypass the runelord's armor using his 2H Maul"
  "Rurik precisely smacks the troll just behind the knee cap where there is a chink in his armor USING HIS KITE SHIELD"

They just doesn't sound right.

I really, really, dislike skill multiplying. Which is also one of the reasons why I don't use the skill halving rule for very high skills.

 

[Archer]

2) I own a two handed sword. It would be practically impossible to breakit by hitting it with another sword while I was holding it.

Unless of course you strike the weapon edge to edge, in which case you would quickly damage both weapons. That you parry that way with swords is a myth perpetuated by movies, comics, and fantasy art.

 

[RosenMcStern]

"Gorbag takes -40% to skillfully bypass the runelord's armor using his 2H Maul"
"Rurik precisely smacks the troll just behind the knee cap where there is a chink in his armor USING HIS KITE SHIELD"

Yes, it sounds strange but:

"Gorbag skillfuly uses his 2H Maul to strike his opponent's helm with such force that his neck breaks, nullifying the effects of his Adamant headgear".

As for the Kite shield, you are right: I will not allow attacks with Shields at full percentile. If you want an extra attack, use a head butt / kick / whatever. The high attack chance with shields on the part of a skilled shield user was the most stupid thing in GURPS, and the main reason I never used that game system. I am in favour of the unified attack/parry unification in MRQ, but making shield attacks a viable tactics for everyone is ludicrous.

And yes, I am in favor of not allowing precise attack to work if they are parried/dodged. This will definitely mean that skill is more important than armor (parrying skill replaces armor usage skill!).

 

[simonh]

Making attacks with shields using the normal rules does lead to some odd results, such as precise attacks with shields(!?), but a skilled shield user can use it offensively. Apart from just buffeting your opponent to stagger or tip him over, you can wedge it into his shield or knock his weapon aside to get an opening, or ram the edge up into his face.

Tricky to come up with sensible, usable rules for that sort of thing though.

 

[atgxtg]

1) Even if you make your parry, the greatsword is only soaking up damage based on it's 4 AP. So making the parry roll has no effect on the sword breaking.

Well, it has some effect, depending on the rolls...it's still absorbing 4 damage.

Nope. An inainimate object gets it AP value. So does an object that is used to parry. About the only difference is that by parrying with the weapon, you risk the opponent getting a critical for 1/2 parrying AP, but I don't think that I'd apply that in the game, as a critical hit doesn't go up against 1/2 AP if it were aimed at the opponent.

Regardless, use Dodge instead of Parry and your sword will take virtually no damage. :roll:

Probably. That is where the magic comes in. By the book, the "minimum damage" rule makes pluses to damage brutal, but with no magic the sword should be safe from most attacks.

2) I own a two handed sword. It would be practically impossible to breakit by hitting it with another sword while I was holding it. My hands wound move or I'd drop the thing first. Now if you laid the thing down on two stacks on cinderblocks and hit it with another two handed, it might breat, but noiot easily. It would probably bend or chip long before it would break, and it would mostly likely ruin the other sword in the process.

And bending or chipping wouldn't make it practically useless in a swordfight, other than as a club?

You are over analysing now - this isn't supposed to be a simulation to the nth degree.[/quote]


No, I'm not over anylyzing. I am expecting that a game with new weapon breakage rules have anylyzed the effects somewhat. People used to complain about weapons being too brittle in RQ2, but MRQ weapons are even less durable. If they are going to chance the weapon breakage rules, and the AP's for parrying the results should be somewhat realsitic and sensible.

The sad thing is, this sort of anylysing is exacxtly the thing that went into the RQ rules in the past. THe damage on parries, weapon APs and all were thought outbased upon experience. Now we have a lot of changes, most of which don't make much sense and cause more problems. In the past was that any weapon in the hands ofany foe was a threat. Take away the old critcal effects, and not anymore. Weapons used to be good at parrying, not anymore. People used to be able to dodge, not now. Armor used to be a worthwhile investment, not anymore. THe penalty to the wearer pretty much offsets it's effectiveness for defense.

A greatsword is pretty much aways a club in a swordfight. The weapon wasn't designed so much for cuttingh as for smashing through heavy armor with sheer weight/impact. In fact, many greatsword did not have a sharp edge to cut with> THe idea wasn't to cut through the armor (not going to happen with maille or plate) but to hit with enough force to do injury despite the armor. Rather than a deep gash, you just brke the foe's collarbone.

 

[zanshin]

Nope. An inainimate object gets it AP value. So does an object that is used to parry. About the only difference is that by parrying with the weapon, you risk the opponent getting a critical for 1/2 parrying AP, but I don't think that I'd apply that in the game, as a critical hit doesn't go up against 1/2 AP if it were aimed at the opponent.

I am not sure the rules are definitive on this point. I would house rule that without a parry the ap applies as an inanimate object, with a parry you get the ap from the parry and the intrinsic ap as you are skillfully diminishing the force of the applied blow on your weapon.

I think beefing up the impact of dodges and parries is the way to control abuse of precise attacks.

Oh someone posited earlier 'how could a bypass armour attck work without targetting a specific locatio?' i would argue that you are going for the opening/gap in the armour wherever it appears to you in the fight - and the random hit location roll covers that. Seems logical to me.

 

[Rurik]

The big difference between RQ2/3 and MRQ is that damaging weapons and bypassing armor are now only achieved by precise strikes. They used to happen incidentally in previous versions, now they will never happen without someone making a precise attack.

I don't know how much people will use Strike Weapon attacks because for the same modifier you can use Bypass Armor, which is so powerful. But if you want to start breaking weapons, the Greatsword is the tool to use in MRQ terms. Against other Greatswords (or any other weapon with 4 AP)both weapons will take equal damage according to the rules. Actually, if you precise attack a dagger, your Greatsword will take the same damage it deals to the dagger :shock: . And Great Axes take the same damage they deal against shield's, so forget about trying to damage an opponents shield with your Great Axe, the Axe will break first. Actually, shields are the best weapons for attacking other weapons in MRQ as they will never take damage, unless you precise attack another shield of equal or greater AP. I can precise attack your Greatsword all day with my buckler and my buckler will never take any damage, but your sword will.

Does Bludgeon work on shields?

I have been running sample combats to explore the rules and tactics. Precise attacking weapons can be a good tactic if you have the right weapon, but as a whole the mechanic seems poorly implemented. Weapons will never break through extensive use, only through precise attacks - and the rules as is have, well, I'll call them quirks.

 

[atgxtg]

Nope. An inainimate object gets it AP value. So does an object that is used to parry. About the only difference is that by parrying with the weapon, you risk the opponent getting a critical for 1/2 parrying AP, but I don't think that I'd apply that in the game, as a critical hit doesn't go up against 1/2 AP if it were aimed at the opponent.

I am not sure the rules are definitive on this point. I would house rule that without a parry the ap applies as an inanimate object, with a parry you get the ap from the parry and the intrinsic ap as you are skillfully diminishing the force of the applied blow on your weapon.

THat is an exceelent idea. But, as you pointed out, the rules are not definative on that.

I think beefing up the impact of dodges and parries is the way to control abuse of precise attacks.

Another excellent idea. The problems with armor peanlties, and precise attacks are due in part, a large part to the fact that defenses in MRQ are pretty weak. Dodgers usually get hit for a few points and do those who parry, since only shields block more than 4 points.

THis is what makes a "bypass armor" attack so devestating, the only defense is to hope the guy fails.

Oh someone posited earlier 'how could a bypass armour attck work without targetting a specific locatio?' i would argue that you are going for the opening/gap in the armour wherever it appears to you in the fight - and the random hit location roll covers that. Seems logical to me.

Actually, I think the post was how can someone make a precise attack and not know where it is going to land? THe who concept of precision goes against a random hit location. It should be something llike "I'm aiming for his leg right above the graves where he isn't armored., or " I'm thrusting through the eyeslit on his visor!"
If we combined the peanlty for specficl location (-40%) with a modfier for covereage, this would make a lot more sense.

 

[Rurik]

Nope. An inainimate object gets it AP value. So does an object that is used to parry. About the only difference is that by parrying with the weapon, you risk the opponent getting a critical for 1/2 parrying AP, but I don't think that I'd apply that in the game, as a critical hit doesn't go up against 1/2 AP if it were aimed at the opponent.

I am not sure the rules are definitive on this point. I would house rule that without a parry the ap applies as an inanimate object, with a parry you get the ap from the parry and the intrinsic ap as you are skillfully diminishing the force of the applied blow on your weapon.

I think beefing up the impact of dodges and parries is the way to control abuse of precise attacks.

Oh someone posited earlier 'how could a bypass armour attck work without targetting a specific locatio?' i would argue that you are going for the opening/gap in the armour wherever it appears to you in the fight - and the random hit location roll covers that. Seems logical to me.

Well, I think the rules are pretty clear. Precise attacks are treated just like any other attack. If you parry or dodge a bypass armor or location strike, you block AP or take minimum damage. Since there is no special ruling for strike weapon, one has to assume that you deduct the AP for the parry before resolving weapon damage or apply minimum damage on a dodge. So I attack your greatsword with mine, you parry. I roll 12 damage. Subtract 4 for the parry, 8 gets through. Each Greatsword takes 8 damage, reduced to 4 After the 4AP.

I also agree that bypass armor involves waiting for an opportunity to strike an exposed location wherever that opportunity may show itself, which is why location is rolled randomly. Besides, combining Bypass Armor and Location Strike into one attack would result in a lot of precise attacks to the head.

Disarm btw is also IMMUNE to normal dodges and ALL parries. On a successful attack the opposed disarm roll is made. Look at the combat tables, only a critical dodge vs. a normal success results in "Attack Fails", all other possibilities result in Attack Succeeds. And on the Parry Table even a critical parry versus a normal attack results in "Attack Succeeds".

Keep in mind there is still an opposed roll to disarm, so I am not saying that Disarm is automagick (sic), just that parrying and dodging are pretty much useless against it.