Preview 2

[Wulf Corbett]

Spears would be equally as good against knights as against anything with rigid armour. Greatswords would be as good against anything with armour. And there are a few of those in Glorantha...

Yes, and in fact they were employed in this manner. But the spear, at that point in time, were mostly used by file-and-rank soldiers, not knights...
...However, considering the general historical period of which most of Glorantha seems to be equivalent too, spears would be more common. Especially the spear and shield combination of fighting in formation.

You answered your own questions there. PCs aren't Rank & File. They're not even Knights. They're HEROES.

Wulf

 

[andakitty]

Heroes? They ambush...from a distance, usually. They run if they think there is a slight chance of getting hurt. They whine. They make unreasonable demands. :roll:

Heroes? Bite your tongue, sir! :lol:

Tis we gamemasters who are the heroes, I say! :wink:

 

[Gallowglass]

... PCs aren't Rank & File. They're not even Knights. They're HEROES.

In HerQuest certainly, in RuneQuest they were usually the scruffy, disreputable types who guard the heroes horses and loot the bodies after the heroes have left: "the little guys on society's underside, scrabbling to maintain a meager subsistence-level ecology. RQ PCs live close to the bone" to quote one S Petersen...

Cheers,

NDM

 

[t-tauri]

Gloranthan swords are embodiments of the Death rune and the Gods of the Air cults, they represent the chosen weapons of the culture's gods hence the profusion of swords.

 

[Rurik]

Swords are the oldest weapons in Glorantha. Humakt invented them about the time he created death. Notice the Death rune is shaped like a sword.

I don't think I have ever run into Humakti Runelord that did NOT have a Greatsword. But then, I don't actively try to run into to many Humakti Runelords....

Weapon preferences in Glorantha are typically cultural/religeous, and swords are very prominent in the Storm Pantheon and therefore "classic" Dragon Pass setting.

 

[Rurik]

Damn you t-tauri, you beat me too it!

 

[t-tauri]

Damn you t-tauri, you beat me too it!

Strike like the Wind!

 

[Rurik]

Damn you t-tauri, you beat me too it!

Strike like the Wind!

Are you telling me to shorten my posts? :wink:

 

[Archer]

Yes, and in fact they were employed in this manner. But the spear, at that point in time, were mostly used by file-and-rank soldiers, not knights...
...However, considering the general historical period of which most of Glorantha seems to be equivalent too, spears would be more common. Especially the spear and shield combination of fighting in formation.

You answered your own questions there. PCs aren't Rank & File. They're not even Knights. They're HEROES.

Wulf

True, I answered my own question (depending on your view on PCs). But I never really intended it as a question. More as a pondering on a comparison between Glorantha and our historical world.

As for player characters being heroes, that all depends on how you choose to run a campaign. I would guess that quite many run a campaign that way, but it is not the only way to run it.

Still, your point is perfectly valid, PCs tend to be extraordinary characters in some sense of the word, even if they are not heroes. And as such, they can have quite odd equipment.

I will not even go into the argument of using bronze instead of steel for weapons (we would argue that one forever, and it really does not matter).
I have the distinct memory of bronze being the more common metal in Glorantha. The only question I have is this; how common are weapons of iron and steel? especially in the second age?

 

[andakitty]

Could be a very important factor considering that the weapons are listed with armor and hit point values.

 

[Malorium]

I have a vague memory of reading somewhere that Glorantha bronze actually has the same qualities as steel (except any iron content of course!).
Remember - the metals on Glorantha are actually the bones of Gods (apparently) so comparing them to real earth metals might be a bit fruitless.

 

[Malorium]

Oh and there are Knights in 3rd Age Glorantha - was it the Empire of War? They were the Sorcery using Knights in full plate etc.

Polearms and Arbalests are the only weapons any self respecting adventurer needs :lol:

 

[Archer]

I have a vague memory of reading somewhere that Glorantha bronze actually has the same qualities as steel (except any iron content of course!).

Real world bronze are not that inferior to steel for the weapons we are talking about. It does not contain any iron either. You make bronze by mixing copper and tin.
Bronze is a bit more flexible than steel, and you can cast it to any form you wish (compared to having to work iron to it's desired form). The breaking strength is lower, and only becomes important when you have very long blades (which are relatively thin compared to the length), such as a great sword. Even so, a bronze great sword would be very useful, if not the primary choice to use to parry blows with.

Remember - the metals on Glorantha are actually the bones of Gods (apparently) so comparing them to real earth metals might be a bit fruitless.

Cool, did not remember that I ever read anything about the metals being the bones of the gods.
I think however, that they are very well suited to be compared to real world metals. In fantasy games, real world metals tend to be underestimated.

The main reason why iron became widespread in use was not that it was that much superior in strength etc. The reason is that there was a large emigration of large populations during the time when the shift from bronze to iron happened. It is a theory of modern day historians that this emigration was largely due to the fact that the main sources of tin and copper had dried out, and people moved in order to try and find new sources. But what they found instead was iron, and iron only required iron ore to be smelted to get iron, compared to the rather complex method and many components needed to make bronze.

 

[Cobra]

As a long time RQ enthusiast, I have a concern about the combat system as it now appears. What happened to the strike ranks? All I see now is a roll that is added to a reaction modifier, with the highest going first. To me, this seems like a D20-ification of RQ. I really hope that in a effort to put RQ out to a broader audience, you have not changed the combat system. I also didn't see any weapon strike ranks in the weapons table. Has weapon speed been dropped as a factor in combat?!

Personally, I've always loved the richness of RQ combat vs. D&D or D20. I never found it cumbersome at all - in our group it went very fluidly and with so much more description that D20. To me, this was one of the essences or RQ, and to change it would make it some other game altogether.

Also, not a concern so much as a query - I notice that weapons now have HP and AP. It seem to me that having two stats where one used to suffice would serve to make combat more complicated, not less. Anybody know anything about this?

Cobra

 

[andakitty]

It looks like there may be some D20 influence, unfortunately. However that is not necessarily a bad thing. To me the worst thing about D20 is too many fiddly bits.

It also looks like BRP in many respects, and BRP games like Stormbringer have used simpler (than RQ) initiative rules that work well. I am very curious and anxious to see the whole combat cycle. The weapon damages don't look well balanced, for one thing. Strike rank/initiative, individual weapon skill descriptions, criticals and other parts of the rules that we can't see right now will, hopefully, change the whole picture.

 

[SteveMND]

Pg 42 of the 2nd preview described the strike rank system, and with the exception of a random element being added (the d10) and higher being better (as opposed to lower being better as in the past), it still sounds like the same system. Slow, small characters with short weapons will still be at a disadvantage to large, fast characters with long weapons.

True, they don't have the determination of the "Strike Rank Modifier" described in the preview, but the combat section's description implies -- to me at least -- a similar process as in previous editions.

 

[Cobra]

I've always found that D20's fiddly bits slowed down combat way too much, and also the glossing over of details bleached the colour out of the narrative.

In our group, a typical D20 combat round might go like this:

PL: "Ok, I rolled a 16. Is that a hit? Oh, wait, I forgot the bard was singing and I have a minus because I'm hung over..."
GM: "Yeah, it's a hit. What's your damage?
PL: "6 points"
GM: (makes a note, then rolls) "Ok, he hits you for 8. I think. What's your AC again?"

But in RQ the same might sound like:

PL: "A hit! Six points to the head, if it gets through!"
GM: "Good blow! We, since his shield strap broke in that fumble a couple of rounds ago, he'll try to block you with Steve's severed arm that he's still clutching in his hand. Woah - 26% - that does it, he manages to get the arm up and block part of the blow. You still manage to connect for 3 points, though. He's angry now, but the good news is that he won't be able to use what's left of Steve's arm for blocking blows any more.
STEVE: moans

I like that fact than in RQ you can react to someone attacking you. You can defend, and in many ways, whereas in D20 you just sit there and take it - your defense skills and armour are all rolled into one stat called AC that you can't even use - it just is.

You are right, they are hinting that size and speed and weapon still come into play. Anxious to see more of combat. Not sure why weapon speeds didn't feature on the table.

Cobra

 

[andakitty]

Too true, Cobra. All the better versions of BRP (aka Runequest rules) offer a certain excitement in tabletop rpgs that I have not experienced with any other system.

 

[homerjsinnott]

I've always found that D20's fiddly bits slowed down combat way too much, and also the glossing over of details bleached the colour out of the narrative.

In our group, a typical D20 combat round might go like this:

PL: "Ok, I rolled a 16. Is that a hit? Oh, wait, I forgot the bard was singing and I have a minus because I'm hung over..."
GM: "Yeah, it's a hit. What's your damage?
PL: "6 points"
GM: (makes a note, then rolls) "Ok, he hits you for 8. I think. What's your AC again?"

But in RQ the same might sound like:

PL: "A hit! Six points to the head, if it gets through!"
GM: "Good blow! We, since his shield strap broke in that fumble a couple of rounds ago, he'll try to block you with Steve's severed arm that he's still clutching in his hand. Woah - 26% - that does it, he manages to get the arm up and block part of the blow. You still manage to connect for 3 points, though. He's angry now, but the good news is that he won't be able to use what's left of Steve's arm for blocking blows any more.
STEVE: moans

I like that fact than in RQ you can react to someone attacking you. You can defend, and in many ways, whereas in D20 you just sit there and take it - your defense skills and armour are all rolled into one stat called AC that you can't even use - it just is.

You are right, they are hinting that size and speed and weapon still come into play. Anxious to see more of combat. Not sure why weapon speeds didn't feature on the table.

Cobra

Poor, Poor, Steve...

Did he get his arm back on? Come on man I'm itching to find out!!

 

[Archer]

As a long time RQ enthusiast, I have a concern about the combat system as it now appears. What happened to the strike ranks? All I see now is a roll that is added to a reaction modifier, with the highest going first. To me, this seems like a D20-ification of RQ. I really hope that in a effort to put RQ out to a broader audience, you have not changed the combat system. I also didn't see any weapon strike ranks in the weapons table. Has weapon speed been dropped as a factor in combat?!

Personally, I've always loved the richness of RQ combat vs. D&D or D20. I never found it cumbersome at all - in our group it went very fluidly and with so much more description that D20. To me, this was one of the essences or RQ, and to change it would make it some other game altogether.

Also, not a concern so much as a query - I notice that weapons now have HP and AP. It seem to me that having two stats where one used to suffice would serve to make combat more complicated, not less. Anybody know anything about this?

Cobra

First of all, what it means for combat (Strike Ranks as they seem to be now) is that RQ has finally been updated with a mechanic that many BRP clones have used since the mid-80s, a rolled initiative.
Strike Ranks / Dex ranks in all their glory, but having tried the many various incarnations or clones of the RQ/BRP system, this is the fastest, with the least hassle involved.

The AP/HP statistics makes sense. More so than the Breaking Value that has been used in many BRP clones. You now have a measurement how resilient a weapon is - how hard it is do do damage to it, and then finally how much abuse it can take beyond that point.