Open Day Folks!

Archer said:
Adept: Rolling for critical injures is ok, rolling for each damage you take is not (in my book).

andakitty: Why I asked the question is that the person who hade participated in the open day test, wrote a text about damage, explaining it in such a way that I percieved it as if you added all damage together, just to make Resistence checks against it, and see if you got unconscious etc.

Ok. My apologies.

I didn't spot that myself.
 
waiwode said:
RQ wasn't immune to this, however. Why use just a sword, when you can use this here sword with a Bladesharp 2 bound to it? That's as old as RQ itself.

Immiune to magic hunting, No. But a RQ character could be differentiated from other similar character types by means other than magical goodies. For example, you could take a group of fighters, remove thier magic and items, and the Humakti, Orlanth Adventurous (Destor), Uroxi, Lunar trooper, and Sun Domer are all still distinct characters. Even two fighters of the same cult can have differences in skills and atributes.
 
RQ wasn't immune to this, however. Why use just a sword, when you can use this here sword with a Bladesharp 2 bound to it? That's as old as RQ itself.

Of course it wasn't immune to it. However, my point was that in RQ, if you lost that sword with BS2 on it, it wouldn't be the end-all of your character.

In fact, you could probably take most any Rune-level character, strip him of all his material gear, requip him with basic stuff out of the rulebook, and he'd still stand a reasonable chance against foes of an appropriate challenge.

Do the same with a D&D character of the same equivalent level... forget it. I'd say some might be able to manage, but the majority of such PCs -- especially fighter-types -- will likely die a grisly death.

RQ (and similar games) tends to emphasize what your character can do with his skills. D&D (and similar games) more often then not tends to emphasize what you can do with your gear.

This makes the prospect of having to "start over" a far more survivable option in RQ than in D&D.
 
Archer said:
A mechanic to handle overall damage (accumulation of damage in all body parts) is needed, to account for chock and bloodloss. Obviously MRQ has such a system, the question that remains is just what it is. The person who did the playtest never said what it was...
Actually what I said (briefly) was "The impact of damage is pretty much like previous RQ except that everything is skill-based: no CON rolls, just Resilience rolls to avoid death and unconsciousness, for example."
There is no central hit point pool, just hit points in each location. And, frankly, after running with it I can now see why for all practical purposes it's an unnecessary complication (and from an improvement perspective a great help as characters don't die quite so quick any more).

Archer said:
...that is why I asked if I understood him right, that what drops a character is the accumulation of damage in all body parts, not just damage in the individual body parts.
Hit locations are fully functional right up to the time they have 0 or less hit points, at which point things start slowly going wrong - the character loses a combat action. At -ve hit points in a location a character loses his next 1d4 combat actions and, like previous versions, cannot use the damaged limb. Resilience rolls to avoid unconsciousness kick in for head, chest and abdomen damage and must be made until the injury is treated.

When (starting hit points * -1) damage is exceeded in a limb the Resilience test must be made to avoid unconsciousness; in other locations the test is to avoid death (from shock) or unconsciousness. The test is repeated until the location is healed or the character dies (which will happen unless he is healed).

So it has a gradual degradation, conceptually by threshhold as suggested (by atgxtg?), but with Resilience tests not being modified by the damage, as was suggested elsewhere, just forced by damage exceeding those threshholds.

Whilst the "punch bag" location issue was also suggested as being necessary, the total HP was still there in old RQ and ime it made no real difference, apart from making characters brittle. Personally, I'm quite happy with the new approach because it's abstracted nicely and works, but then I prefer things gritty, character-playing (rather than item-playing: nice point, SteveMND), and simple.

Hope this helps!
 
Thank you, Halfbat. I have played an almost identical hit point system before, and have been pleased by this part of MRQ since I first heard about it (preview #6). It seems to be a hard rule to except by RQ players. I houseruled hit point pools into the game mentioned, then tried it without the pool and immediately thought it a great improvement. I hope the folks with the doubts will at least try it, it does work quite well.
 
SteveMND said:
Of course it wasn't immune to it. However, my point was that in RQ, if you lost that sword with BS2 on it, it wouldn't be the end-all of your character.
In fact, the BS2 Example was meant as a minor point. I think the prevalence of tattoos in later RQ3 material was the real response, a "if we stick it in our bodies you can't take our focuses" reaction.

I am in complete agreement with you and atgxtg on this matter, otherwise.

Doug.
 
waiwode said:
SteveMND said:
Of course it wasn't immune to it. However, my point was that in RQ, if you lost that sword with BS2 on it, it wouldn't be the end-all of your character.
In fact, the BS2 Example was meant as a minor point. I think the prevalence of tattoos in later RQ3 material was the real response, a "if we stick it in our bodies you can't take our focuses" reaction.

The first time the characters are captured will cure them of that. After their matricies are forcibly and painfully 'removed'.
 
waiwode said:
Archer said:
Only game I know that really does this well is Legend of the Five Rings.
L5R certainly isn't the only game with a Death-spiral, complete with "now I lay down and sleep" stage. Death Spirals, where the character gets worse and worse as they get injured, are pretty common.

I know there are others. It is just the implementation in L5R that makes it very easy to keep track of. So far the only solution I feel are good enough without being too complicated.

waiwode said:
And in a way, RuneQuest, predating the Death Spiral by over a decade, sort of did it first. Sure, you don't fight worse as you get injured. But lose all the HP in your arm (if notr actually loosing the arm) and you are basically out of the fight, lose all your leg or any central area HP? Time to have a nice lie down.

Well, unfortunately there is nothing to force the character into unconsciousness unless his arm is hangling from the shoulder with just a few shreds of tendrils. You basically have so seriously hurt someone in RQ to incapacitate them.
And it was this fact that I was discussing earlier.

waiwode said:
Facing intelligent and possibly somewhat compassionate opponents and surrender becomes a pretty good choice if you don't have any friends to pull your *ss out of the fire (and even Lunar hoplites are likely to take prisoners if your Orlanthi rebel yields), although admittedly no one in their right mind surrenders to Broo.

Even Pendragon had something similar, with Major Wounds and Knockdown ... and if you were knocked down by an uninjured knight it's time to throw up your visor and cry "Pax!"

In the modern dungeon context surrender seems like the worst option (and I'm certainly not rushing off to the world's hot-spots to volunteer as a hostage) but in a role-playing game the escape from captivity can be a great adventure in itself. Or securing ransom for your friends. Or rescuing your friends from captivity. There's a lot of ways a minus can be used as a plus in this regard.

Doug.

Yep, being prisoners are good motivations for players. Some of the most crazy and desperate acts (and plans) have come to pass in the situation where the players have been taken prisoner.
However, I have yet to encounter a player that says "I surrender!" due to injuries suffered. More often they fight until they die, no matter the odds. That is unless the setting strictly specifies that you do not kill your enemy, and the player characters are offered the chance to surrender. But knowing my current group of players, I doubt they would take that offer.
 
Well, the best game for encouraging surrender, IMO, was the James Bond RPG. Pretty much once in each adventure the characters would be in a postion where surrender really was the best option. It usually allowed them to get past all of the villan's defenses and into the heart of his complex, where they could more easily screw up his plans.


Thank heaven for villians with complexes! :)
 
atgxtg said:
Well, the best game for encouraging surrender, IMO, was the James Bond RPG. Pretty much once in each adventure the characters would be in a postion where surrender really was the best option. It usually allowed them to get past all of the villan's defenses and into the heart of his complex, where they could more easily screw up his plans.


Thank heaven for villians with complexes! :)

Hehe, I remember our only James Bond campaign fondly.
Our game master had just recently seen the movie (dont remember which it is) where he gets rocket propelled bullets to fire from his pistol.
My character ended up having those, and some other nifty gadgets.
We also encountered a villain what stroked his cat so much that it began to go bald...
 
The Bond, game sranks up there in my "top 5" list. Surprisingly, it was also one of the hardest games for the players to get a handle on. I think becuase the game was so differenet from the other RPGS that they played. THe group would often try and turn things into a firefight. THis susually put them out against too much firepower, at the wrong time, and without any information.

One of the adventures that really had me shaking my head was when the PCs, frustrated becuase they couldn't figure out how to infliltrate the villian's organization (they had a way in until "Mister Charisma" beat the socks off the villian at bacarrat, and then stole his girlfriend-even the PCs were sympathetic), decided to reprot the villian to the local police.

"Ah, I see, he is a smuggler. Yes. How do you know this? Are you a smuggler,too?"

"No! Of course not, I work for the British Secret Service! It's my job to know such things."

"Oh, so you are a spy?"

"Yes!"

"Arrest this man!"

"What for?"

"Espionage."

-------------------------------------

How dumb can you get.
 
Halfbat said:
...
Hit locations are fully functional right up to the time they have 0 or less hit points, at which point things start slowly going wrong - the character loses a combat action. At -ve hit points in a location a character loses his next 1d4 combat actions and, like previous versions, cannot use the damaged limb. Resilience rolls to avoid unconsciousness kick in for head, chest and abdomen damage and must be made until the injury is treated. ...
What does "-ve" mean?
 
seanwalsh said:
Halfbat said:
...
Hit locations are fully functional right up to the time they have 0 or less hit points, at which point things start slowly going wrong - the character loses a combat action. At -ve hit points in a location a character loses his next 1d4 combat actions and, like previous versions, cannot use the damaged limb. Resilience rolls to avoid unconsciousness kick in for head, chest and abdomen damage and must be made until the injury is treated. ...
What does "-ve" mean?

Negative value of normal value. If you have +5 HPs in the left arm, then -ve would be -5 HPs in the left arm.

Halfbat: Thank you for your explanation.
 
Halfbat said:
archer said:
Halfbat: Thank you for your explanation.
No probs. I hate to be misunderstood so tried to make myself more clear.

Clear as crystal now.

Just another question, if you do not mind; On average, how many rounds did a combat take before an opponent was down and out? Basically, how long did it take to decide a combat between two opponents. If you have any estimate or real experience of this from the playtest.
 
I haven't playtested, just taken part on the day so I can't give long-term figures: hopefully one of the playtesters can.

I thought combat was about the same as previous versions: at low levels it can take a long time wearing each other out then suddenly collapse, whereas at high it can get rough really quick. Four low-level characters against a lion lasted 4-5 rounds before the lion dropped, and then only because they managed to mob it.

As always, armour is vital. However, only the highest armour at a location counts so there is no stacking of armour.

Sorry I can't help on that one... maybe in few months? :)
 
Well, thank you. The info you have provided still answered my question in a way. It gives me an estimate to have in mind when I work on my own settings that will use the RuneQuest rules.

Also, thank you for the info on armor.
 
Back
Top