The problem with Resists...

[atgxtg]

THe big deal is that with past edtions, you didn't need to houserule things. THat was a matter of preference. With MRQ houseruling is a necessity. Most of the things being houserulled now are thing where everyone is looking for an alterantive to a core rule, rather than individual GMS around thier gaming table.

This is true, but unfortunately it is largely true with any game I have bought and played (beyond D&D/d20) in the last four years. I think it is phenomenon that is due to a lot of rookie game designers are now beginning to make new versions of older games, a sort of a "new start" for most RPGs.
I think there is very little else to be said there. Most games today are rather "broken" in one aspect or another. The most horrible example must be the Swedish RPG Drakar och Demoner that since 2000 has gone through no less than four editions, each time radically redesigning the basic rules fundamentally. The latest edition finally scratched any semblance to the previous editions and began with an all new system, only a few bits and pieces remains.

Probably why I haven't like most games released in the last four years. THey look very poorly designed. There are some exceptions, but for the most part, the currenty crop of RPG products are the sort of things that shouldn't have been released. Very sloppy. When someone points out a glaring defenct they uses get hit with countercharges of not "role-playing".

BTW< I disagree with the "tweak one rule and it won't have a big effect elsewhere" thought. Since the game is all interlinked, changing one aspect of the game requires changes in other areas or new problems will apear. An example is the "extreme lethal" damage tables. Use them and sudddenylu parrying becomes meaninless unless one is using a kite shield.

A change in one area usually affects several other areas.

It is a far cry from d20. Try to change d20 by adding a +2/+3/+4 bonus to an attack/save for a class, or try to create rules for parrying and dodging, or try tweaking any aspect of the rules, and you will end up having to rewrite all the rules form scratch to take into account and balance the rules because of the changes (look at Conan, prime example that it can be done but that it requires a lot of work).

I believe it is more of a change in empahsis between the games. D&D has always been obsessed with "balance" between the character classes. Player A's 8th level character should be "balanced" against Player B's character. Basicaly it is players not wanting someone else to get something more than they have. Likewise D&D focues almost exclsuively on combat applications, and that is what is being "balanced".

RQ, by constrast, didn't work that way. A Strom Bull Rune Lord is going tob e more powerful combat-wise than an Issaries trader. They don't "balance", and that is okay.

Very few aspects of RQ would radically change every piece of the game just because I change it.
If I change the rules so that a parry always blocks all damage and a successful dodge always avoids all damage, that does not break the system anyway near as much as if I add +2 to the attack bonus of the paladin class in D&D.

Yes, they would. Changing the parry rules in MRQ would be a more radical chance than the +2 to the Paladin's BAB. The difference is that the D&D players would scream "play balance" while the RQ players would consider the ramifications-and probably bring up the knife fighters vs. greataxe situation. It not that RQ has fewer ramifications, it is that RQ players look at things differently.

In fact, as it stands now, the only really big blunder with RQ seems to be the resist rolls, which can make you invulnerable (or at least as near invulnerable that you may just ignore the 1% failure risk) from certain spells.

The no total hps (punching bag syndrome), halving rule, dual or one attack roll, less effective parries/dodges are frustrating and perhaps not the best ideas seen in RPG rules, but they work (I think current RQ will need at least an edition or two more before the rules have all their "weirds" worked out). Which can not be said about the resist rules for spells.

It definetly shows that it is very hard trying to make something that is better than Basic Role-playing (including previous editions of RQ), but not being allowed to make it BRP.

I disagree. What it "definiet;ly shows" to me is lack of understanding of the RQ system, and a strong need for better coordination, edting and proffreading. The book, examples, and errata all seem to point to differenrt mongosse employees running differenrt games, and not communicating with each other.

Fact remains that the basic structure of BRP works so well that it is very very hard to replace it with mechanics that works in an equally easy played and logical manner.

Yes. THat is why I find it hard to understand most of the changes that Mongoose has chosen to make. THe changes don't work more easily, or play better, or more logically. We went from one way to resolve die rolls to 3, and from roll low to roll low sometimes. The core book is a mess.

It is a shame that the desingers of current RQ has replaced the Resistance table with such a nice mechanic as the opposed rolls (the only mechanic that can replace it) and then they do not use it enough for such things as spells vs resistance.

Making a spell casting roll opposed by the resistance roll to resolve the "conflict" would have been perfectly in line with how the basics of MRQ works. Unfortunately they instead choose a simple unopposed roll to resist spell effects.

So to return to the original topic, perhaps that is just what we need to solve the problem. When a spell is resisted, the spellcaster makes a secondary casting roll that is opposed by the targets resistance roll.

In the Arkana campaign setting I am writing for these rules, I am going to use either the Magnitude x 10% penalty or the opposed roll as described above for the magic system. I just have not given it that much thought yet.

I think it will be a sure bet to assume that we are going to see a lot of variations of the RQ rules, if RQ should succeed in becomming a standard OGL system like d20 has been for a large number of settings and games.
At least it is a beginning, perhaps the "best" RQ rules will in the future not be made by Mongoose, but a third party. Pretty much like what Mongoose has done to WoTC.

I think that what we will see is one or more of the variants becoming the new stadnard rule set, with MRQ rules being tossed to the wayside. The idea of running RQ2/RQ3 or BRP and grabbing a sosettings book has already been mentioned and it would be far easier to get a MRQ setting to run in RQ3 than in MRQ!

 

[Hoitsu]

I was thinking this resistance thing and came up with this. I f i have understanded correctly, sorcery spells take 1 mp point+1 mp per manipulating skill used in it. So they take a lot less mp than in previous versions. How about that you can use more mp to make the resisting more difficult. lest say 1 mp per -10% or -5%? Would be useful and dont have to change the rules massively. Is there a possibility that target can raise the resistance by spending mp? like it is in case of Rune Magic? if there is, use -10%/mp point, and if there is not, use that -5% instead. Or if you want sorcerers to be powerful use -10% or even -15%. Easy and useful, i would say

 

[Archer]

That works pretty well, and you would avoid adding extra dice rolls to the resolution. So I am all for it.

So we have;
1. Take a penalty to induce a similar penalty on the target.
2. Target takes a penalty equal to Mag x 10% (still leaves some characters immune).
3. A second opposed spell casting roll vs resistance roll to determine outcome.
4. Spend extra MPs to induce a -X/MP pentalty for the target.

 

[Arkat]

Is there a possibility that target can raise the resistance by spending mp? like it is in case of Rune Magic? if there is, use -10%/mp point, and if there is not, use that -5% instead.

That does exist in the rules already. It's in the spell description section I think.

 

[simonh]

This is fine until you hit high level, and your Resists spells are up in the 90s - at that stage, you are virtually impervious to Rune Magic, regardless of the power of the caster.

If you boost your spells with extra MPs, each extra MP reduces the target's Resist roll by +10%.

Also the target can blow MPs to increase their resistance, but only get +5% per MP.

Thus for experienced characters, your MP resource management becomes crucial. I've had characters blow up to around 15 MPs to boost spells and punch through defences in previous editions of RQ. This part of the game seems workable to me, you just need to take advantage of the options available.

 

[gamesmeister]

This is fine until you hit high level, and your Resists spells are up in the 90s - at that stage, you are virtually impervious to Rune Magic, regardless of the power of the caster.

If you boost your spells with extra MPs, each extra MP reduces the target's Resist roll by +10%.

Also the target can blow MPs to increase their resistance, but only get +5% per MP.

Thus for experienced characters, your MP resource management becomes crucial. I've had characters blow up to around 15 MPs to boost spells and punch through defences in previous editions of RQ. This part of the game seems workable to me, you just need to take advantage of the options available.

I don't agree at all that this makes it workable.

Firstly, to punch through those resists, you're going to need to use a lot of MPs on every spell you cast, which means you are soon going to run out of MPs.

Second, for every MP you put in to overcharge the spell, you have a -10% to your runecasting skill. So giving your opponent a -50% to his resist will give you a -50% to your casting. And if you do fail, you'll lose all those extra MPs too, not just a single point.

This is before I even start spending MPs to boost my Resists, or defend with Countermagic...

This is not a workable system IMO, and needs fixing.

Gerry

 

[Exubae]

Is the mp capped by divine magic usuable at all, in particular for resisting and punching through resistance, or is it tied up completely.

It just strikes me as odd that a Priest with 12 points of divine Magic isn't goint to have many free MP for such augmentations even if has a allied spirit... Magic Point Matrixes, Pow storage crystals are going to be a must have item for every priest.

 

[hoc]

Frist post here.. might as well start here..

gamemeister wrote:

Second, for every MP you put in to overcharge the spell, you have a -10% to your runecasting skill. So giving your opponent a -50% to his resist will give you a -50% to your casting. And if you do fail, you'll lose all those extra MPs too, not just a single point.

A -5% casting (and persistence) per MP actually.. And gives -10% resist penalty to the target. Overchargning also acts as a boost trough countermagic and agaist dispel magic. AND gives additional duration.

Runecasting skill does matter a lot in high level combat.. ( So good magicians have good runecasting skills.. and you need to concentrate on areas.. you can be an awesome darkness runecaster, but a mediocre earth magician) And MP of course. Say you have 40 points of MP stored around your hero level character. You need to use strategy on where to spend the mp.. You can always burn trough them quickly by resisting a lot or casting huge spells, but..

What's good with overcharging compared to pervious editions of RQ is that the spells don't take longer to cast. In RQ3 for example, a really boosted spell could take longer to cast than most combat lasted.


simonh wrote:

This part of the game seems workable to me, you just need to take advantage of the options available.

Yes, the new runecasting rules actually bring more strategy and variance to magical combat. At least from a quick clance of the system.

 

[Vadrus]

Is the mp capped by divine magic usuable at all, in particular for resisting and punching through resistance, or is it tied up completely.

It just strikes me as odd that a Priest with 12 points of divine Magic isn't goint to have many free MP for such augmentations even if has a allied spirit... Magic Point Matrixes, Pow storage crystals are going to be a must have item for every priest.

The MP is not available for casting or any other activity, so a POW 21 Runepriest with 20 points of Divine Magic has 1 MP left to play with :shock: Of course if he uses it he goes unconcious :twisted:

This is probably why MP vs MP spirit combat was dropped as Divine Magic Users would be possessed every time they left the temple. Mind you with the current one roll system the GM can pretty much do that to them if he feels like anyway.

Another fun part is you cannot 'Top Up' used Divine Magics, i.e. if you know shield 5 and use 2 points in combat you cannot learn and pay for 2 pts, instead you have to forget the remaining 3 points and buy it fresh at level 5 so Divine Magic is very expensive in an ongoing campaign.

At the moment in a long term campaign the PC's are far better learning Sorcery than any other type of magic. They are certainly going to be far far richer than any other caster as their costs, especially versus divine magic users, are trivial.


Vadrus

 

[gamesmeister]

Frist post here.. might as well start here..

gamemeister wrote:

Second, for every MP you put in to overcharge the spell, you have a -10% to your runecasting skill. So giving your opponent a -50% to his resist will give you a -50% to your casting. And if you do fail, you'll lose all those extra MPs too, not just a single point.

A -5% casting (and persistence) per MP actually.. And gives -10% resist penalty to the target. Overchargning also acts as a boost trough countermagic and agaist dispel magic. AND gives additional duration.

Is it -5% (don't have my book with me)? Ok, not quite as bad as I first thought, but I still think it's a big problem.

Yes, the new runecasting rules actually bring more strategy and variance to magical combat. At least from a quick clance of the system.

I'm not disputing that - I like the concept of runecasting. But making resists a skill roll makes it a flawed system in my book

 

[Trifletraxor]

The no total hps (punching bag syndrome), halving rule, dual or one attack roll, less effective parries/dodges are frustrating and perhaps not the best ideas seen in RPG rules, but they work (I think current RQ will need at least an edition or two more before the rules have all their "weirds" worked out). Which can not be said about the resist rules for spells.

The old rules worked very well. These new ones obviously don't, or at least, need repairing. They're not easier than the old ones, and not more realistic either. I can't really understand why they just didn't improve the old rules. What killed RQ before was the lack of new published supplements and scenarios, not poor rules.

I think that what we will see is one or more of the variants becoming the new stadnard rule set, with MRQ rules being tossed to the wayside. The idea of running RQ2/RQ3 or BRP and grabbing a sosettings book has already been mentioned and it would be far easier to get a MRQ setting to run in RQ3 than in MRQ!

I'll adjust my RQ rules just enough to be able to run MRQ scenarios. It seems the rules are close enough for this to be done. I applaud Mongoose for bringing new life to RQ, and I will certainly buy their new scenarios. I just wish they had improved the old rules instead of creating these new rules that "work" but are fundamentally flawed.

SGL.