Statisticals. What is 'Average'.

[Urox]

You could, of course, abstract distances in terms of SIZ. Instead of jumping over a chasm 2.2m wide you could say the chasm is SIZ 20 or whatever.

I think that MQ may lend itself more to the abstract, so you'd have a chasm that is Wide: 15% and have characters make opposed Athletics rolls to jump over when encumbered.

 

[King Amenjar]

I think that MQ may lend itself more to the abstract, so you'd have a chasm that is Wide: 15% and have characters make opposed Athletics rolls to jump over when encumbered.

That's going all Heroquesty...

 

[atgxtg]

I remember I had a PC who was abnormally tall and skinny. He had a SIZ of 15, but for game purposes, we ruled that his effective SIZ when dealing with height was 17, and his effective SIZ when dealing with weight was 13. Mind you, he was supposed to be exceptionally (even freakishly) tall and skinny; for typical members of a race, there was no need to really break it down like that.

What? You didn't put out the RQ2 appendix page 98 and use the split Height and Weight rules? Shame on you. :wink:

 

[atgxtg]

You could, of course, abstract distances in terms of SIZ. Instead of jumping over a chasm 2.2m wide you could say the chasm is SIZ 20 or whatever.

That's a really novel apporach to using SIZ. I'm not sure how you would implement it (DEX vs SIZ on the resistance table to jump, rather than a Jump roll), but it's a really neat way of looking at it.

 

[Rurik]

I think guys are taking the rules off in a direction they weren't intended to go. From reading the Skills chapter and looking at the modifier tables I think jumping a chasm is supposed to be a straight athletics test. The chasm would be given a modifier if wanted, such as wide, -20%.

I mean, not all skill checks are supposed to be opposed, many (most?) will just be simple skill checks.

 

[atgxtg]

I would take SIZ 13 as the human average of maybe 1.75m and 75kg. (up and down 10%)

Well, using the forumula of something (SIZ^1.414x2 kg) we get 75.18kg for SIZE 13. Not to far off. BTW, I was thinking that since we roll 3 dice and take the two highest average SIZ might up up to 14 now.

I have to agree with atgxtg in this matter. (one of the few agreements we have ) Abstraction is not worth anything. Luckily you can use the usual BRP resistance table and the weight table as a good tool for such things. I would recommend to incorporate it into MRQ. This should solve the most of your simulation problems.

We don't disagree on that many things. JUst that we disagree repeatedly on the same things. There is a difference.

 

[Nagisawa]

So no one has a handy dandy chart for me to use until we get a semi-official answer to this?

 

[iamtim]

I was just talking to someone who has seen early copies of the Companion, and it appears as though a size chart appears therein. According to him, SIZ 13 represents 77-83 KG.

Damned Europeans and their Metric System.

It appears that there's a full compliment of critical and fumble tables, too.

 

[atgxtg]

77-83?!?

It look like they are using the same SIZ chart as RQ3. If so you can use this chart until the companion comes out.

 

[atgxtg]

I was just talking to someone who has seen early copies of the Companion, and it appears as though a size chart appears therein. According to him, SIZ 13 represents 77-83 KG.

Damned Europeans and their Metric System.

It appears that there's a full compliment of critical and fumble tables, too.

Sounds like it has the RQ system. Anyone know if the moun damage bonus for charge is is there?

 

[Rurik]

Sounds like it has the RQ system. Anyone know if the moun damage bonus for charge is is there?

Mounted damage bonus is in the core rules. Actually, in MRQ you get your mounts bonus AND your own.

 

[atgxtg]

Sounds like it has the RQ system. Anyone know if the moun damage bonus for charge is is there?

Mounted damage bonus is in the core rules. Actually, in MRQ you get your mounts bonus AND your own.

WHere? I am looking under the mounted combat section (page 57) and don't see it. Am I looking in the wrong spot or not seeing something in front of me?

 

[Rurik]

It is under the weapon description for Lance in the Equipment chapter.

Sure would be nice if it were mentioned in mounted combat also.

 

[Nagisawa]

atgxtg? Thanks for the Chart, it helps immensely!

 

[atgxtg]

It is under the weapon description for Lance in the Equipment chapter.

Ah. Looks like the obiligatory fluff text isn't so fluffy. A few of the weapons have special notes there. Hmm..

THanks for the info, that was a major beef on mine about mRQ. Not so much that I couldn't house rule it, just the direction it's absense hinted at for the game, i..e. wimping it up for the D&D crowd. Lance damage is still a bit low, but it's better. (1d10+2+1d4+1d10+character's db)


Sure would be nice if it were mentioned in mounted combat also.

Yeah, seeing as how there is a whole section and all. It's where I looked for it. Hope the didnt stick any Unarmed Combat rules under the hit location desciptions. :wink:

 

[atgxtg]

atgxtg? Thanks for the Chart, it helps immensely!

No problem (okay slight problem, I couldn't print the PDF and has to screen capture it). If there are any other charts (like the old fumble chart?) you want to hold you over until the companion comes out just post.

I have though of an option to use STR and SIZ with lifting. BAsically letting a character lift up to his STR in SIZ/mass without requring a skill test. Then allowing for, say, twice that, with a test. Just an idea.

 

[wartorn]

Abstraction sucks because it doesn't give you a baseline to use when making judgements. How tall is Size 9? Can she (I have a female Acrobat as a test character) reach that shelf 1.83m (approx. 6ft) up above to get the magical pie, or will she need to climb to get it?

Edit: Er, what atgxtg said...

And ANYONE arguing what is or isn't in a medival society needs to look at the GM and have him/her put her foot down and give an answer. Because it's not a Medival Recreation game, it's RuneQuest and RuneQuest is NOT Earth.

Don't like it, play something else.

I want the pie.

So I'd like to keep the baby lose the bathwater. I see Athletics, Resilience and the other skill as being the 'skill' side of characteristics. Athletics for instance representing:

-How well you've learned to use what God gave you. So a highly trained athlete or soldier might be smaller and weaker than his barbarian counterpart but his 100% in athletics means he's trained very hard and knows how to (for example) lift heavy objects by positioning his body just so, using his legs etc..

-The development of the smaller supporting muscles that let you use big muscle groups (represented by raw STR) effectively.

-Simple 'muscle memory', modelling for example the way you can perform a jump spinning side kick without thinking about it after doing it 3000 times - but applied to raw physical activities like climbing etc..

All of which is great to have modelled but shouldn't mean a damn thing when a troll is sitting on you.

I'm thinking of bringing back the Characteristic side of this in a relatively simple fashion like so:

A: If the difference in stats is greater than 20 the higher stat wins no matter what.

B: Your basic chance of success is your Athletics skill, like before.

C: If the difference in Characteristics (STR, CON, POT etc..) is less than 5 [a little wide ranging but its a nice easy number] there is no change to this formula. This is to limit the need to refer to this mechanic.

D: for every 1 point of difference beyond 5 between characteristics, apply a 5% penalty to the lesser and give a 5% bonus to the greater

E: For every 1 point of difference beyond 10 between characteristics apply a further 5% penalty to the lesser and a further 5% bonus to the greater

Lean, defined, veteran of many wars, Ancient Bob - athletics 100, STR 5
The portly Wretched Ingvar - athletics 50, STR 20

As per C: contest is effectively 10 vs 20 (ignore up to 5 points of difference)

As per D: first further 5 points of difference gives 25% penalty to Bob, 25% bonus to Ingvar

If it was 5 vs 15 we'd have an even contest 75 v 75

As per E: last 5 points gives 50% penalty to Bob, 50% bonus to Ingvar

100 vs 50 becomes 25 vs 125

Basically much like the resistance table, but scaled out a little more with some semi-irritating maths thrown in. Does this work?

 

[atgxtg]

Yes it does, but maybe it could be simplied. Say break up athletics into a DEX a STR based skill starrt them off at DEXx3 or STRx3 or even DEXx5 and STRx5 (if you don't mind hitt the 100 range) and the add improvement from there.

Just do the same to any opposing force.

Then just use with the oppsed skill resolution. You won't need to track the stats becuase that is factored into the skill, and the opposed system held to match the abilties against each other.

 

[homerjsinnott]

Abstraction sucks because it doesn't give you a baseline to use when making judgements. How tall is Size 9? Can she (I have a female Acrobat as a test character) reach that shelf 1.83m (approx. 6ft) up above to get the magical pie, or will she need to climb to get it?

Edit: Er, what atgxtg said...

And ANYONE arguing what is or isn't in a medival society needs to look at the GM and have him/her put her foot down and give an answer. Because it's not a Medival Recreation game, it's RuneQuest and RuneQuest is NOT Earth.

Don't like it, play something else.

The reason size doesn't have a 'it is this tall' is because different creatures,
Oh why am I bothering answering this?

 

[atgxtg]

The reason size doesn't have a 'it is this tall' is because different creatures,
Oh why am I bothering answering this?

Except the different creature are (or at least were) all built on the same heright and weight scales, although were generally more concered with SIZ as mass rather than height.

I do have the old RQ2 SIZ tables tha give a height and weight. It doesn't quite match up with RQ3 or MRQ, easpecially with the SIZ chance from 3d6 to 2d6+6.