Ok, Another Thread About MRQ II

[Blackyinkin]

Hi,

Also there is one thing to note, Gloranthan sorcerers will mostly belong to a cult, in order to progress in that cult they don't just have to get magically more competent, they also have to perform mythical acts, which could easily leave them burned out shells, trapped on the Saint Plane or condemned to the Underworld

Simon

 

[Blackyinkin]

Hi,

Anther option would be to restrict the amount of spells found in each grimoire, in your game there may only be one or two spells in each book. This means to gain a swathe of powerful spells the sorcerer will have to spend years searching across the world, learning the texts and then training in the use of the grimoire, which gives the same effect and provides lots of adventures.

Simon

 

[dbhoward]

I somehow get the feeling that it is indeed so complicated that my players will just go for the max damage. And - as I understand it - that (going for max damage that is) will actually be possible whenever you hit and the other fails to dodge/parry, right ?

Well, I've played RQ since the AH days and just ran my first combat session with MRQ2. Very satisfied with the result. River pirates jumped my player group's boat. Lots of dancing about the deck, thrusting and parrying. One pirate got a nasty arm wound, dropped his sword, hence was cut down; the crowning moment was when the PC with a recurve bow at the aft of the boat got a clear shot and drove an arrow through the pirate chief's knee (Choose Location, Maximize Damage). He went down and the PCs were able to interrogate him after the fight.

Mind you: this was the *first time* these folks had played any flavor of RQ. Mostly old D&D'ers. But they got it, right off the bat.

Tactical and intuitive rules that drive roleplaying choices. Excellent work, Pete and Loz.

***dbh***

 

[Mongoose Pete]

Mind you: this was the *first time* these folks had played any flavor of RQ. Mostly old D&D'ers. But they got it, right off the bat.

Happy customers!

Its nice to see that when presented with the possibilities, they didn't just go for the kill.

Tactical and intuitive rules that drive roleplaying choices. Excellent work, Pete and Loz.

As your players intuitively surmised, the combat rules allow for victory without unnecessary slaughter. RQII can be deadly, but need not be if you like to play the social or scenario consequences of deliberate killing. :wink:

 

[PrinceYyrkoon]

I'd have went for the head. If the pirate had any important info, the GM would have to give it out anyway by other means.

I'm just saying.

 

[Nostrildamus]

I'd have went for the head. If the pirate had any important info, the GM would have to give it out anyway by other means.

I'm just saying.

"Yyrkoon," said Nostrildamus, "This is unwise of you."

Going back to your question about CAs, there are options. Obviously, you can raise your stats so that your CAs eventually come up, as you suggested. Also, taking a weapon style with a shield, such as Sword and Shield, will grant you a bonus CA anyway, as the shield is an aid to defense (though you do not have to use that CA for defense). One thing I really like in this new version is the concept of combat styles like the aforementioned. Previously, using a shield was a separate skill for parrying, so it meant the character had two skills to focus on. With only one, you roll the same skill to attack or parry. Simpler and actually more realistic, since someone training with the two from the beginning would improve in the use of each together.

I mentioned that called shot to the head and it seems to have created a lot of questions. Obviously, you and I think alike about the obvious use for the called shot in the first place (not so much taking out a leg...). Yes, it's very lethal from that standpoint, but the Hero Points really do factor here. Characters have them, baddies don't. You have the potential to avoid the worst, they rarely do.

In response to another poster about shortening combat not necessarily being a good thing, that's down to preference. Combats that are close quarters and devoid of cover utilization, in the real world, don't last long. I like the idea of combats only being lengthened by the height of the skills from both combatants. Two highly skilled combatants may even fight to a draw, while lower skilled combatants or two combatants with a clear skill disparity will have a shorter combat span. It makes sense to me, but mileage always varies.