Immunity To Trollkin "feature" - any comments

[simonh]

Speeddart was a good spell. Now it is fairly useless. Why blow a buch of POW for a one shot spell when something like Bladesharop lasts for ten minutes?

Speedart wasn't overpowered either, since casting one usually cost you one of you shots for the round.

Good points, although I think a sniper with Speedart and fate, perhaps cast by supporting magicians, will just be unbelievably deadly.

Speedart was usualy only cast as an opening gambit in a combat, or as a necessery move to give a chance to get through armour and protection magic. Without it missile attacks would have been much less effective in RQ3, but as you say it certainly didn't overpower them.

Simon Hibbs

 

[atgxtg]

A lot of this discussion isn't taking into account the profound difference between MRQ and previous editions when it comes to the rules for bypassing armour completely.

Daggers are not useless in MRQ, in fact they are far more deadly than in previous editions so long as the wielder has a dagger skill of 50% or more. Let's have a look at the odds for the cyharacter to do damage in RQ3 and MRQ, assuming 50% skill.

No way.

First off, lets go without any armor. THat way we are taking killing power.

MRQ: Dagger does 1d4+1. THat means a maximum of 5 points. Simply incapable of killing an uninjured human character, peroid. Even a critical only does 5 points, although pulling the dagger out "might" kill someone with a low SIZ and CON.

With normal hits, it is going to take a long time to drop someone, as there is no total hit point score. Basically the knife fighter must either bring the head, chest, or abdomen to negative numbers, or hack off a limb in order to possibly incapacitate the oppoent.


RQ3: Dagger does 1d4+2. IN addtion there are total Hit Points. So with average hits, the dagger wielder can kill an average person with about 3 hits. Big Difference. If the dagger weielder gets a special success (1/5th) he does double damage. If he criticals it is double max damage, with 12 points to one location being more that enough to take down a man in RQ3.


We throw in armor, and even the precise attack rule, and the dagger still is better in RQ3. in MRQ it takes a while to take out a location. Remember if you are bypassing armor then you can't call the shot. So without total hit points you typical MRQ character can soak something like twice as much damage. Maybe more like 3 times, since people get pretty good rolls to stay up an active where they would be down and out in RQ3.

THe RQ3 guy, even facing someone in plate is still better off. For one thing, his special success at 2d4+4 are going to penetrate enven plate most of the time, and hit criticals for 12 points bypassing armor will probably take down an armrored foe with one hit.

And that is not counting the fact that the typical RQ3 character would be adding a +1d4 damage bonus.





No comparison.


In fact, I'd say that the only weapons that are not deadlier in RQ3 are the bows, and IMO those just kept parity for losing thier impale and bypass criticals while everything else dropped behind.

Practically any situation that dropped a MRQ character would have killed a RQ3 character, probably long before the MRQ character. THe reverse is not true.

 

[iamtim]

Practically any situation that dropped a MRQ character would have killed a RQ3 character, probably long before the MRQ character.

Just coming in to the conversation here, but is that being touted as a bad thing?

I thought the system was designed for a little bit more character survivability?

 

[Rurik]

Practically any situation that dropped a MRQ character would have killed a RQ3 character, probably long before the MRQ character.

Just coming in to the conversation here, but is that being touted as a bad thing?

I thought the system was designed for a little bit more character survivability?

Except that once a skill is 45 or 50 you can count on Precise attacks to bypass armor.

Simon's point is weapons are more deadly because of the ease of bypassing armor, which is true. atgxtg's point is the damage is slightly nerfed, the crits are very nerfed, and the average character can take potentially many more hits (because of slightly more hp/location and lack of total hp).

They way I see it is they are both right, just arguing slightly different things. Daggers aside I think the precise attack makes the game much more deadly.

(reminds me of good old Cyberpunk 2020 days when combat went like this: called shot to the head, called shot to the head, called shot to the head)

 

[atgxtg]

Practically any situation that dropped a MRQ character would have killed a RQ3 character, probably long before the MRQ character.

Just coming in to the conversation here, but is that being touted as a bad thing?

I thought the system was designed for a little bit more character survivability?

We got a LOT more character survivabilty. What 5 disrupts could do in RQ3 takes something like 15 or 20 or more to do in MRQ. No gneral HP combined with the resislience rolls = 30-50 hit point characters.

THat is more than a little more. That is a lot more. JUst what the D&Ders ordered.

Of course the "giritty reasltic" rules have yet to be seen. THose might have character's dropping like in Swordbearer.

"Eeek a sword! Arrk!" >THUMP<.

 

[Rurik]

We got a LOT more character survivabilty. What 5 disrupts could do in RQ3 takes something like 15 or 20 or more to do in MRQ. No gneral HP combined with the resislience rolls = 30-50 hit point characters.

THat is more than a little more. That is a lot more. JUst what the D&Ders ordered.

Of course the "giritty reasltic" rules have yet to be seen. THose might have character's dropping like in Swordbearer.

"Eeek a sword! Arrk!" >THUMP<.

In many (most) ways we have more survivability in MRQ. I still say a Great Troll with a 60-80 skill is more lethal. Got armor? Bypass it. Parry? Hope you have a sheild, cause weapons only block 2-4 (twice that if you crit) Dodge? Crit or take minimum plus rolled db (which is a d12 for the average great troll). And he will possibly knock you back, forcing you to close again.

 

[atgxtg]

We got a LOT more character survivabilty. What 5 disrupts could do in RQ3 takes something like 15 or 20 or more to do in MRQ. No gneral HP combined with the resislience rolls = 30-50 hit point characters.

THat is more than a little more. That is a lot more. JUst what the D&Ders ordered.

Of course the "giritty reasltic" rules have yet to be seen. THose might have character's dropping like in Swordbearer.

"Eeek a sword! Arrk!" >THUMP<.

In many (most) ways we have more survivability in MRQ. I still say a Great Troll with a 60-80 skill is more lethal. Got armor? Bypass it. Parry? Hope you have a sheild, cause weapons only block 2-4 (twice that if you crit) Dodge? Crit or take minimum plus rolled db (which is a d12 for the average great troll). And he will possibly knock you back, forcing you to close again.

You will take more damge from high powered attacks in mRQ-no arugment there. THe parry and dodge rules barely stop most weapons without any enhancements. THrow in a high damage doing weapon, a good db and or a magica enchancement, and you wind up with no good way to defend. I've mentioned before that a bladesharp 3 or 4 is goinna blast through dodges and weapon parries.

A dark troll wielding a Great Hammer @ 60% with bludgeon 4 on it and doing 1D10+1D6+8 is going to be nearly impossible to parry OR dodge. Even by another dark troll. Ten points minimum damage, 17 points average, 24 max.

But...

You can actually survive that 24 point hit to the head. You gotta make a couple of rolls to stay alive and concious, but a guy with a high relsience skill canhave a 90% of still being up and fighting! A beginning character with averages stats has a 21% chance of survivng such a hit, and a 4% chance of being up fighting.

Still a lot less lethal than RQ.

 

[iamtim]

Just what the D&Ders ordered.

Not to catch a square with you, but how does one make the leap from the increased character survivability of MRQ to the constant character bloat of D&D?

 

[mthomason]

Just what the D&Ders ordered.

Not to catch a square with you, but how does one make the leap from the increased character survivability of MRQ to the constant character bloat of D&D?

I also found D&D incredibly difficult to survive through the first session due to the way hit points started at virtually nothing and shot through the roof over the course of your character's adventuring career.

Many is the 1d4HP magic-user I lost from a single hit connecting.

 

[atgxtg]

Just what the D&Ders ordered.

Not to catch a square with you, but how does one make the leap from the increased character survivability of MRQ to the constant character bloat of D&D?

It doesn't. What it does do is provide D&Ders who migrate to MRQ the sort of survivabilty that they expect for adventurers. It takes several sword hits to drop someone, just like in the 3-9 level range in D&D where the game works best.

Oh, and I don't believe I've qualified one damage system as "better" than the other, just saying the MRQ isn't a lethal as RQ3. I thought that was a given, but apparently not.

 

[atgxtg]

Many is the 1d4HP magic-user I lost from a single hit connecting.

We gave one guy a standing ovation (and something like 1000XP) for getting a 1HP MU to second level. THe guy used to take an extra rtime when reading his spelll book so he wouldn't get a paper cut and die.

 

[mthomason]

We gave one guy a standing ovation (and something like 1000XP) for getting a 1HP MU to second level. THe guy used to take an extra rtime when reading his spelll book so he wouldn't get a paper cut and die.

LMAO!

 

[atgxtg]

We gave one guy a standing ovation (and something like 1000XP) for getting a 1HP MU to second level. THe guy used to take an extra rtime when reading his spelll book so he wouldn't get a paper cut and die.

LMAO!

I have never seen such a case of justifiable paranoia. It is virtually impossible to get a beginning character to second level without taking 1 point of damage. The close calls were hysterical. Talk about nail biters. It was like watching someone going for a "no-hitter". Every time he had to make a saving throw or something the room went quiet.

It was a pity how he got turned to stone latter on (saw "lifelike stone statures" entered the room backwards with a mirror to avoid the Medusa's gaze, and got pecked by the Cocatrice, thanks to a +4 from hehind), but he survived 1st level with one Hit point.

 

[iamtim]

What it does do is provide D&Ders who migrate to MRQ the sort of survivabilty that they expect for adventurers.

Ah, there we go. That I can swallow.

Still don't see why that's a bad thing, though. I know you and I feel differently there'bouts.

 

[atgxtg]

What it does do is provide D&Ders who migrate to MRQ the sort of survivabilty that they expect for adventurers.

Ah, there we go. That I can swallow.

Still don't see why that's a bad thing, though. I know you and I feel differently there'bouts.

Depends on the sort of situations you put you players in. Situations where someone sneaks up behind the big burly guard and jabs a dagger in him will play out differently. Ditto someone "sniping" the guy on watch.

"Why little man make Mongo angry?" :>CRUNCH<:

 

[Archer]

Depends on the sort of situations you put you players in. Situations where someone sneaks up behind the big burly guard and jabs a dagger in him will play out differently. Ditto someone "sniping" the guy on watch.

Yep, that is problematic. With the current rules, as with previous RQ and BRP incarnations, it can not simply be done with a dagger. Not unless you have a huge damage modifier, or is able to strike several times in a row quick with a dagger. And even if you are, you are likely to only wound the guard if he is wearing armor.

"Why little man make Mongo angry?" :>CRUNCH<:

A Princess Bride, a classic.

 

[iamtim]

is able to strike several times in a row quick with a dagger

So... just sneak up on the guy and surprise him with a flurry attack using precise shot.

 

[Vadrus]

is able to strike several times in a row quick with a dagger

So... just sneak up on the guy and surprise him with a flurry attack using precise shot.

I would tend to rule that you can't use Flurry and Precise Attack together as the description of Flurry is your sacrificing accuracy for speed, kind of the exact opposite of Precise Attack.


Vadrus

 

[iamtim]

I would tend to rule that you can't use Flurry and Precise Attack together as the description of Flurry is your sacrificing accuracy for speed, kind of the exact opposite of Precise Attack.

Yeah, note the smiley.

On a more realistic (from an MRQ POV) would a surprise flurry be sweet?

Sneak, sneak, sneak, ATTACK! ATTACK! ATTACK! ATTACK! Die.

 

[Archer]

is able to strike several times in a row quick with a dagger

So... just sneak up on the guy and surprise him with a flurry attack using precise shot.

You can not combine Flurry and Precise Attack, they are mutually exclusive. Says so in the text about Flurry. Otherwise that would have been a very good combination for taking out guards..