magic armour and precise attacks
- Thread starter gran_orco
- Start date
Well the description says it ignores all armour points, and the Protection spell explicitly says it can be bypassed by Precise Attacks.
Technicaly according to the prcise wording we have now Damage Resistance shouldn't be bypassed because it doesn't actualy give armour points, however I'd definitely say it should be treated the same way as Protections and Shield and should be bypassed by Precise Attacks in the same way, and Rules Lawyers who say otherwise can Burn in Hell.
:wink:
Technicaly according to the prcise wording we have now Damage Resistance shouldn't be bypassed because it doesn't actualy give armour points, however I'd definitely say it should be treated the same way as Protections and Shield and should be bypassed by Precise Attacks in the same way, and Rules Lawyers who say otherwise can Burn in Hell.
:wink:
Trifletraxor
Mongoose
simonh said:
What!? Precise attacks bypassing magic protection? Finding the glitch in the spell? That's just plain silly. :?
SGL.
simonh said:
Hereto and Thereafter, there is reasonable precedent that some, present incanters included, have voiced previous the current moment, that the action aof making a precise attack, and thereafter succeeding, ignoring all protection at best seems a dubious proposition, and should therefore be construed to be at best dubious, and may even warrent a provision of silly.
Whereas should we operate under the assumption that such a precise attack, being made and succeeding, should bypass all forms of armor, corporeal, spiritual, or otherwise, one cannot surmise as reasonable that all magical protections should also be so disregarded as to be rendered innefectual.
Also: Carry a big sheild. Practice saying "Bypass this motherf****r!"
RosenMcStern
Mongoose
You are not supposed to. He is just kidding.
In fact, the rules are not crystal clear. I would say it is not bypassed, but at best I am stating an Orlanthi truth (80% chance).
Which Hell, Malkioni, Orlanthi or Uz?
In fact, the rules are not crystal clear. I would say it is not bypassed, but at best I am stating an Orlanthi truth (80% chance).
simonh said:
Which Hell, Malkioni, Orlanthi or Uz?
In RQ 3 the spell Damage Resistance worked differently from all other protective magic. The others acted like armor and subtracted their value from the damage. Damage Resistance on the other hand opposed the incoming damage with its magnitude, giving the user a 50% to ignore the damage if it was the same magnitude as the spell. This chance was modified by 5% for a point in either direction.
E.g.: Damage Resistance 8 would grant a 50% chance to ignore damage if it is also 8 points, 80% if it is 2 points and 10% if it is 16 points.
The spell was able to counter critical strikes and targeted hits, as it did not act as armor. At a first view, this is not a problem. After a longer second glance I had to houserule it, that it can be bypassed by criticals like the other spells (my campaign lasted 8 years, so I got to see what happens if a character is played for a long time...like having Damage Resistance 28 ).
My guess is now that this is still as it was in RQ 3, and the spell is intended to work against precise hits. I have not yet read the new enchantment rules (especially how to create a spell matrix), but if you are in doubt, I suggest you houserule Damage Resistance to be AP.
Vatras
E.g.: Damage Resistance 8 would grant a 50% chance to ignore damage if it is also 8 points, 80% if it is 2 points and 10% if it is 16 points.
The spell was able to counter critical strikes and targeted hits, as it did not act as armor. At a first view, this is not a problem. After a longer second glance I had to houserule it, that it can be bypassed by criticals like the other spells (my campaign lasted 8 years, so I got to see what happens if a character is played for a long time...like having Damage Resistance 28 ).
My guess is now that this is still as it was in RQ 3, and the spell is intended to work against precise hits. I have not yet read the new enchantment rules (especially how to create a spell matrix), but if you are in doubt, I suggest you houserule Damage Resistance to be AP.
Vatras
RosenMcStern
Mongoose
gran_orco said:
Read the spell description carefullt. It states that if the damage is higher, it passes through Damage Resistance and its full effect is then absorbed by Shield and Protection (and armor) if any. So your DR 10, armourblessed character is still vulnerable to 11+ damage blows. Your average Greatswordsman is still able to harm him.
Trifletraxor said:
Ah, another person that thinks magic protection is some kind of Star Wars force field? You've been watching too many science fiction films.
It's a 'suit' of magic armour. Shield spells are a magic shield. Think mythic reality.
Anyway even force fields can have weak spots - just ask Dr. Who about the weak spot in the Dalek's force field near the eye stalk.
Turloigh said:
He got me, what can I say?
I can only plead that I was arguing for the intent of the rules as written. I'm not arguing that precise attacks to bypass all armour are a good thing.
I'm tending to the idea that the way to handle this is to have aunified critical hit/precise attack system. e.g. On a critical hit you can either choose any of the Precise Attack options, or deal double damage, or do max rollable damage and impale (for impaling weapons). Something like that.
However my general point is that whatever rules you use for bypassing armour should also apply to magical protection.
Trifletraxor
Mongoose
simonh said:
I haven't been watching too many science fiction films. I've just played a hell of a lot RQ3.
Protection is a suit of magic armor??? Think mythic reality???
Oh yes, now I see the weak spots in your shield spell! I'll attack between the magic hauberk and the magic helmet! YES!!!
SGL.
RosenMcStern
Mongoose
It has already been argued in previous edition forums that Protection and Shield make natural or worn armour tougher (or skin, if you are wearing no armor). This means that if you bypass the normal armor the magic one is bypassed as well.
However, a different ruling (in the errata?) could be a good idead form MRQ.
However, a different ruling (in the errata?) could be a good idead form MRQ.
Trifletraxor said:
A critical hit in RQ3 bypassed all material and magical armour.
Deluxe RuneQuest Player's Guide for RQ3, Page 55, Critical Success Attack Roll - "...the adventurer has managed to get a blow, missile, etc., past any armour or other protection the target has and do damage to what the protection should have guarded. ..."
Allowing magical defences to stand in the face of a critical hit was a common error among RQ3 players.
Absolutely, if you used magical sight it's liklely you would see something like that, depending on the spell. In Glorantha magic generaly does have visible effects, so you might be able to see the areas covered best by the magic.
Trifletraxor
Mongoose
RosenMcStern said:
Okay, lets say it toughens the skin. How do you bypass skinarmor?
SGL.
Trifletraxor
Mongoose
simonh said:
So you have played with critical hits being able to go through skin armor too? I think you misinterpret the old rules. Magic spells and skinarmor is not mentioned in sentences you are quoting. To me they read "the adventurer has managed to get a blow, missile, etc., past any armour (f.ex. his ringmail hauberk) or other protection the target has (f.ex. his soft leather shirt) and do damage to what the protection should have guarded. ..."
If it was meant to bypass EVERYTHING, even magic and skinarmor, I think it would have stated so more clearly. Still, you MIGHT be right, in which case allowing magical defences to stand in the face of a critical hit was a common good houserule among RQ3 players.
In MRQ, with the new precision attack to bypass armor, if you let it bypass magic too, both protection from ARMOR and MAGIC becomes a total waste when fighting highly skilled opponents, as everyone would opt for the bypassing armor attack at -40%. It might work with lowlevel charcters, as for them a 40% reduction would probably make them fail their attacks, but not with highpower characters.
SGL.
Bypassing a skinarmour is hard but possible. It is not protecting every square inch of your skin. Eyes, mouth, armpits, groins, behind your kneecap for example. Hard to hit in those places but that skin armour of your is not definetely protecting these places.
Magic armour is different, dont know about that.
Magic armour is different, dont know about that.
'past any armour or other protection the target has.' How much more clear cut can you possibly get! This was a great rule. I'm with SimonH on this. There was (IS. We're still using it!) always the, admittedly often remote, chance that trollkin slingbolt would find the gap in your chain overlaps, the streetpunk's dagger would get into your eyeslit, you'd manage to hit the dragon in the goolies etc etc. It was a small chance but increased convincingly linked to the fighter's experience. It short circuited munchkinism ('I've got Shield 4 and Extension 3 I wade blithely through the enemy ranks...'). We always play this rule as it is written and not as if it actually meant something else but forgot to say it. Thus magic protection's were not absolute but could, very rarely, be bypassed. No one was utterly invincible in a D+D buckets of HPTS good AC kind of a way. Ignoring armour completely for a -40% penalty!!! This is bonkers. Surely noone out there is actually using this piece of nonsense. At least not using it and wearing heavy armour... :wink:
