Is this right?

[zozotroll]

I only have the basic book, and pirates. I have just about everything for RQ1,2,3 and had no intention of getting MRQ until they did something that was significantly better than the old stuff. Then they had to go and do pirates.

I rolled up severalPCs no problems. And them, I had to do a practice fight, cutlas on cutlas, big problem.

I am only discussing success vs success. But, for evry 12 svs, and a dammod of only 1d2, only one is totaly stoped, The other 11 will inflict some damage. And 1 in 12 will inflict enough damage to total all locations but ab or ch. And this is on a successful parry.

This just does not meet my expectations of a sword fight in the age of pirates. I had expected a volley of shots, followed by a bunch of rouseing swordplay. What I am going to get, once my players spot this which will be half way through the first fight, is a volley, followed by another volley folled by another, until they run out of loaded guns. And they will pack a lot of guns.

I read the thread on shield, but most of that doest apply. I have read the players update, and that is what I used. so either, I dont get this at all, and am again haveing a dumbattack, or this system doesnt really work for this.

So which is it?

 

[weasel_fierce]

with the updated rules, a successfull attack is completely avoided by a defense roll thats higher than your attack.

 

[Rurik]

I only have the basic book, and pirates. I have just about everything for RQ1,2,3 and had no intention of getting MRQ until they did something that was significantly better than the old stuff. Then they had to go and do pirates.

I rolled up severalPCs no problems. And them, I had to do a practice fight, cutlas on cutlas, big problem.

I am only discussing success vs success. But, for evry 12 svs, and a dammod of only 1d2, only one is totaly stoped, The other 11 will inflict some damage. And 1 in 12 will inflict enough damage to total all locations but ab or ch. And this is on a successful parry.

This just does not meet my expectations of a sword fight in the age of pirates. I had expected a volley of shots, followed by a bunch of rouseing swordplay. What I am going to get, once my players spot this which will be half way through the first fight, is a volley, followed by another volley folled by another, until they run out of loaded guns. And they will pack a lot of guns.

I read the thread on shield, but most of that doest apply. I have read the players update, and that is what I used. so either, I dont get this at all, and am again haveing a dumbattack, or this system doesnt really work for this.

So which is it?

In the Players Update the Success/Success results and Critical/Critical results ONLY apply on actual rolled ties. If both parties succeed the worst roll is downgraded 1 step (to a failure in most cases).

For example, two scurvy dogs are having a go at eachother with cutlasses over who shall have a lass. They both have a 75% skill in cutlass. Scurvy Dog One attacks and rolls a 38, and Scurvey Dog Two rolls a 66. They both succeeded but Scurvy Dog Two rolled better than Scurvy Dog One, so Scurvy Dog One's result is downgraded to a failure. Checking the chart shows the Attack Fails, so no damage is done.

Had Scurvy Dog One scored a critical and Scurvy Dog Two rolled a normal success, no one would be downgraded. Had both of them rolled a critical (and not rolled a tie) the worse roll would be downgraded to a success.

Don't feel bad, you are not the first to be confused by the workings of the new table.

The Original combat resolution pre first and second players updates had a second roll and used a different table. Weapons either blocked 1xAP or 2xAP, and dodges either took No Damage or Minimum Damage based on this second roll - that is why AP for weapons is so low - often they got doubled. (This way actually is still in printed Hawkmoon as well the original core).

 

[zozotroll]

Thank you both. I see that now. However, that still leaves me more than a bit disapointed in Pirates. So you need to keep the calculater handy for every attack.

That seems to make it a bit harder to estimate your chance to parry, so likely, back to pistols.

I dont really care that this will kill off monsters, I got lots of badguys. But it makes it a bit hard on PCs.

 

[Rurik]

Thank you both. I see that now. However, that still leaves me more than a bit disapointed in Pirates. So you need to keep the calculater handy for every attack.

That seems to make it a bit harder to estimate your chance to parry, so likely, back to pistols.

I dont really care that this will kill off monsters, I got lots of badguys. But it makes it a bit hard on PCs.

I'm not sure about why you think you need the calculator. Highest roll under skill wins. It is pretty simple really.

 

[zozotroll]

So you do it as straight numbers, I was thinking percentage.

And yes I have a player or two who will need a calculater to handle subtraction. That or painfully watch him count down on his fingers. And he is a Firechief!!

 

[JohnLokiBeard]

You're still trying to be too complicated. No subtraction needed, it's the highest number showing on the dice if both succeed.

 

[Rurik]

So you do it as straight numbers, I was thinking percentage.

And yes I have a player or two who will need a calculater to handle subtraction. That or painfully watch him count down on his fingers. And he is a Firechief!!

Well the opposed mechanic was met with some controversy - but it is highest roll wins - no calculator needed even for simple subtraction.

Say Joe and Bob are fighting. Joe has a 60% and Bob a 75%. Joe rolls a 58 and Bob a 44. Both succeed, but Joe rolled higher, so Joe wins.

If Joe rolls a 72 and Bob a 14, Joe failed his skill check and Bob made his, so bob Wins.

RQ and BRP have always been 'roll' low for skill checks, but the roll highest under skill method for opposed rolls works for two reason:

1) It is very easy to see who won without math or calculators.

2) The math behind opposed rolls favors the lower skill if you go with roll low wins (calculator required to prove this - but it has been done).

 

[weasel_fierce]

I imagine it came from BRP's cousin, Pendragon

 

[zozotroll]

OK, to long RQ. I think I was subbing best roll for highest in my brain. That does not feel like RQ, but if it works, OK.

And this is supposed to be better?

Certainly no more great trolls powering through a shield, but that is not to cool if you have a lot of troll players. I am haveing trouble seeing a duck parrying a trolls great maul. Again, great for the duck. Nots so cool for my party of trolls.

 

[AKAramis]

OK, to long RQ. I think I was subbing best roll for highest in my brain. That does not feel like RQ, but if it works, OK.

And this is supposed to be better?

Certainly no more great trolls powering through a shield, but that is not to cool if you have a lot of troll players. I am haveing trouble seeing a duck parrying a trolls great maul. Again, great for the duck. Nots so cool for my party of trolls.

It works quite well in Pendragon.

The only time you need to calculate is when one (or both) have skills over 100... then you simply add the amount over 100 to the results before comparing. (The Update made it much more pendragonesque.)

 

[Rurik]

OK, to long RQ. I think I was subbing best roll for highest in my brain. That does not feel like RQ, but if it works, OK.

And this is supposed to be better?

Certainly no more great trolls powering through a shield, but that is not to cool if you have a lot of troll players. I am haveing trouble seeing a duck parrying a trolls great maul. Again, great for the duck. Nots so cool for my party of trolls.

The newest players update has certainly been controversial - players seem to love or hate it. A group of us brainstormed a while back looking for simplified resolution that handled trolls vs. ducks and came up with this:

http://www.justanotherwebsite.net/mrqwiki/index.php/Non_Tabular_Combat

The rest of Mr Qwiki is worth a look too.

 

[Rurik]

It works quite well in Pendragon.

The only time you need to calculate is when one (or both) have skills over 100... then you simply add the amount over 100 to the results before comparing. (The Update made it much more pendragonesque.)

It works better in Pendragon IMHO as highest under skill is always best, as criticals are when you roll your skill exactly. In MRQ it seems awkward because criticals are still roll low, so it is in effect roll really low, or else roll high.

And also because almost 30 years of BRP has conditioned us to think low is good.

But I agree that once you get used to the MRQ system it works very well and quickly becomes second nature.

 

[atgxtg]

It works quite well in Pendragon.

The only time you need to calculate is when one (or both) have skills over 100... then you simply add the amount over 100 to the results before comparing. (The Update made it much more pendragonesque.)

It works better in Pendragon IMHO as highest under skill is always best, as criticals are when you roll your skill exactly. In MRQ it seems awkward because criticals are still roll low, so it is in effect roll really low, or else roll high.

And also because almost 30 years of BRP has conditioned us to think low is good.

But I agree that once you get used to the MRQ system it works very well and quickly becomes second nature.

You know the critical and fublmes could be altered to "rolling doubles" eliminated the math entirely. We would need a slight tweak for skills over 100 and cricals though.

Maybe anything than ends in a 0 is a crit or fumble (under/over skill). Then for skills over 100 we count rolls than end in 1, 200 counts rolls ending in 2 and so forth. I think mathematically the percentages are about the same as 1/10th without the math.

 

[algauble]

Maybe anything than ends in a 0 is a crit or fumble (under/over skill). Then for skills over 100 we count rolls than end in 1, 200 counts rolls ending in 2 and so forth. I think mathematically the percentages are about the same as 1/10th without the math.

I think for the latter system to work mathematically you have to add in the additional consideration of how far above 100 your skill is; that is, if you have a 120% skill, then 01 and 11 would be crits along with 10, 20, 30 etc, but not 21, 31, 41 etc.

It's a little quirky, but without that extra step, you're basically just doubling your crit range at 100, tripling it at 200, etc.

I think I like this idea on some level, but I'd hate to have to explain it or defend it on internet forum discussions.

 

[weasel_fierce]

Maybe anything than ends in a 0 is a crit or fumble (under/over skill). Then for skills over 100 we count rolls than end in 1, 200 counts rolls ending in 2 and so forth. I think mathematically the percentages are about the same as 1/10th without the math.

We did a "any double is a special, either critical or fumble" system for a BRP game once, and liked it. We didnt worry about anything over 100 though

 

[Sadric 86th]

I was a skeptic until I actually played it out in a lengthy battle. It worked like a charm in my Elric game. Remember, a critical still beats a normal success, a normal success still beats a failure but when the two combatants both roll the same level of success, the higher roll wins is fairer to the combatant with the higher skill rating.