Games Master's Handbook: Questions (mostly about combat)

[GoingDown]

I have been reading GM's Handbook (great book by the way), and I have some questions:

In page 67-69 in combat example, when Baron has lost his sword he decides to draw his 2nd sword (in his 2nd combat action). During 3rd combat action he is still drawing his sword and cannot use it yet. Why? Drawing sword should only take one combat action?

In same example, a little later, 3rd combat round, 2nd action, Jurgen charges. His charge is finished on NEXT combat action when he attacks and gains +1d4 to his damage. So charge takes too two combat actions to complete. We have always played so that the attack has been made within the same combat action. Attacking only in next CA actually sounds really good and I thing I might use this in future. But is this how it is intended, are you guys using it like this?

In page 11, there is phrase "In worlds such as Glorantha, magic is commonplace, and whilst rune ownership might be uncommon, cults offer access to Rune Magic as part of their membership" Even it is not clearly said in Glorantha books, we can assume that cults really give access to their cult Rune magic without rune integration?

As I don't like demoting combat results in success-success situation, I will not do that, and it feels OK. But does anyone have good reason to USE result demotion, why it would be better (OK, I know that it speeds up combat between veteran-level characters, but anything else)?

 

[weasel_fierce]

In page 67-69 in combat example, when Baron has lost his sword he decides to draw his 2nd sword (in his 2nd combat action). During 3rd combat action he is still drawing his sword and cannot use it yet. Why? Drawing sword should only take one combat action?

I'd blame the combat example on being wrong (examples always are). THe combat rules clearly make drawing a weapon one action

In same example, a little later, 3rd combat round, 2nd action, Jurgen charges. His charge is finished on NEXT combat action when he attacks and gains +1d4 to his damage. So charge takes too two combat actions to complete. We have always played so that the attack has been made within the same combat action. Attacking only in next CA actually sounds really good and I thing I might use this in future. But is this how it is intended, are you guys using it like this?

Same thing. Reading the rulebook, the charge move includes the attack

In page 11, there is phrase "In worlds such as Glorantha, magic is commonplace, and whilst rune ownership might be uncommon, cults offer access to Rune Magic as part of their membership" Even it is not clearly said in Glorantha books, we can assume that cults really give access to their cult Rune magic without rune integration?

Most people play it that way. I think the text only means that they teach the spells.

As I don't like demoting combat results in success-success situation, I will not do that, and it feels OK. But does anyone have good reason to USE result demotion, why it would be better (OK, I know that it speeds up combat between veteran-level characters, but anything else)?

Its faster and easier, it also makes high skill much more marked, and it can avoid defense getting too strong.

I thought about using the standard "success-success" result for situations where the defender makes his roll, just not good enough

 

[GoingDown]

In page 67-69 in combat example, when Baron has lost his sword he decides to draw his 2nd sword (in his 2nd combat action). During 3rd combat action he is still drawing his sword and cannot use it yet. Why? Drawing sword should only take one combat action?

I'd blame the combat example on being wrong (examples always are). THe combat rules clearly make drawing a weapon one action

I did read it again and realized what was going on. Baron has lower strike rank that Jurgen, so when Baron start to draw his sword on his 2nd combat action, it is only finished on his 3rd action - but Jurgen has already possibility to do HIS 3rd action before drawing sword is ready. So, example is correct, only thing which was confusing me was that Baron did not do anything in his 3rd action, thus making me thinking about draw sword-action taking two combat actions.

 

[RosenMcStern]

As I don't like demoting combat results in success-success situation, I will not do that, and it feels OK. But does anyone have good reason to USE result demotion, why it would be better (OK, I know that it speeds up combat between veteran-level characters, but anything else)?

I am experimenting with using both methods in my pbp, calling the unopposed roll "block" and the opposed roll "parry". I think this better represents the difference between using a shield and parrying with a weapon. It will take some time, though, to check whether this actually speeds combat or bogs it. At present the players are still a bit confused.

 

[Faelan Niall]

This is what I have been using for about 16 sessions, and the players love it. It has been quick and easy to use. Combats against equals turn into somewhat longer, but extremely dangerous events as lady luck plays a bigger part than she does when turning mooks into puree. All my players prefer it over any of the other options we have tried out during the extent of the campaign.

Opposed Tests
Opposed tests are made by both characters attempting the relevant skill test. Both characters make the tests as normal, rolling 1D100 and attempting to roll equal to or under their skill.

One Character Succeeds
If one character succeeds their test and the other fails, the successful character has won the opposed test.

Both Characters Succeed
Whoever rolled the lowest in their skill test compared to their modified skill wins the opposed test.

Both Characters Fail
Whoever failed by the lowest amount compared to their modified skill wins the opposed test. (this does not apply in all situations, the gm must use his judgment. It never applies to a combat situation.)

Very High Skills
Very High Skills and Automatic Failure
For normal skill tests, this means that the character simply has only a very small chance of failing in their specialized skill (the usual 96 to 00 chance of failure, with 00 being a fumble). However, once a character’s skill score reaches 200% in a particular skill, they only suffer a failure on 97 to 00 when rolling tests with that skill, with 00 still being a fumble. Once a character reaches 300%, the failure chance reduces to 98 to 00. At 400%, the chance is reduced to 99 to 00. Finally, at 500%, the character will only fail on a roll of 00 and this is not considered a fumble.

Opposed Rolls in Combat
Opposed rolls work the same way for combat as they do for non combat actions, however when comparing results to the combat charts increase the winners level of success by one degree. If this results in a degree of success greater than a Critical reduce the opponents level of success by one degree instead.
For example: Warrior A attacks and Warrior B defends. Warrior A succeeds with a critical attack, and B succeeds with a successful parry. B however wins the opposed roll, and he is now considered to have rolled a critical parry. If B had succeeded with a critical parry, A’s attack would have been reduced to a success.

 

[Nickbergquist]

A charge could take more than one CA if you had to spend the first CA moving to close the distance and finish the charge + attack on the second CA, right?

EX: Attacker moves 4 meters. He can close on CA 1 with a target 6 meters Away declaring his charge; he moves the first 4 meters on CA 1, and the next 2 meters+attack in CA two, finishing his charge.

That's how I've been managing it....someone let me know if this is incorrect.

 

[Rasta]

A charge could take more than one CA if you had to spend the first CA moving to close the distance and finish the charge + attack on the second CA, right?

EX: Attacker moves 4 meters. He can close on CA 1 with a target 6 meters Away declaring his charge; he moves the first 4 meters on CA 1, and the next 2 meters+attack in CA two, finishing his charge.

That's how I've been managing it....someone let me know if this is incorrect.

I do it this way as well.

 

[GoingDown]

A charge could take more than one CA if you had to spend the first CA moving to close the distance and finish the charge + attack on the second CA, right?

EX: Attacker moves 4 meters. He can close on CA 1 with a target 6 meters Away declaring his charge; he moves the first 4 meters on CA 1, and the next 2 meters+attack in CA two, finishing his charge.

That's how I've been managing it....someone let me know if this is incorrect.

That sounds good. I might starting to use this too.

 

[Daithi O'an tSionnaigh]

I picked this book up the other day and was very happy with what I saw in there. Lots of useful ideas and all useable and for a decent price. Unlike the Dungeon Masters Guide for D20 which too me was overpriced and really useless in the grand scheme of things.

RuneQuest RULES!

 

[Lakritsploppen]

How are the alchemy rules? thats the one i am curious about!