 
|
|
|
( 21.08.2008 )
|
|
|
|
( 28.07.2008 )
|
|
|
|
( 21.04.2008 )
|
|
|
|
( 12.02.2008 )
|
|
|
|
( 10.02.2008 )
|
|
|
|
( 12.10.2007 )
|
|
|
|
( 17.07.2007 )
|
|
|
|
( 03.07.2007 )
|
|
|
|
( 13.04.2007 )
|
|
|
|
( 29.01.2007 )
|
|
|
Categories
Discussion
Main - Rune Quest
RE: Some Rule clarifications
|
Author:
Bjorn Are Stolen
|
Time:
24.02.2003 23:20
|
Text:
> Recently - mainly from the slash special discussion - I
> looked through my rule booklet and came up with a few rules
> I think should be modified.
>
> In regard to weapons - I think the mauls should follow the
> rules as if they are a two weapons - one in each hand.
???
> Unlike the two-handed sword, the quarter staff uses both
> ends and both ends could be used in the same melee round
> just as two daggers could.
I agree.(In my houserules I allow for two attacks or two parries (or one of each) for all 2h seapons.)
> In regard to over 100% splitting your attack - you should
> be able to attack the same target twice. It makes no sense
> to me you can attack two seperate targets, but not both
> attacks on the same.
I didn't know this wasn't allowed, I've allways done it as you suggest.
> Two weapons should be able to be parry the same weapon.
> This is essentially a cross parry.
Agree, but I don't know how this should differ from an ordinary parry exept from that you use two actions on one parry, perhaps?
> Two weapons also should be allowed to attack simultaneous
> with an aimed attack, both hitting in the same SR. The two
> weapons should be the same though. The weapons should be
> counted as one weapon for attack damage and being parried.
> Should be considered individual weapon for dodging.
I think this doesn't fit into the RQ consept of the mellee round; mabye if you use it in conjunction with the "aimed attack"?
> Aimed attacks should occur not on SR 10 but randomly
> between the Melee SR+1 to 10. The way the rule works now is
> that the supposed open only opens at the end of the round.
> With this rule it may open before the target gets his
> attack.
Agree
> I think a mounts additional damage bonus should be used
> even for non-lances. Perhaps not the full amount (Though I
> am leaning that way)
Agree
> Finally, I play that Armor loses AP just like weapons. If
> you get through the armor there has to be a hole in the
> armor.
In my houserules armor loose AP from cutting damage, but not from thrusts. I let The critical hit cover the possebility to hit in a hole in the armor. I'm seriously considering to divide the armor into three categories; piercing AP, cutting AP and bashing AP; this will complicate things, but allso make everything more realistic. You try and cut through chainmail... Then try and bash somebody with chainmail, and finally try and stab him. I know what I'd go for (rapier...)
> Also - before my changed aim attack listed above I use to
> play that if the attacker declares a position, he hits it
> if he makes less then 50% on his score. I never liked the
> aiming rules as in the book.
OK, I suppose; aiming becomes increasingly easier as you develop. But I think this might be realistic, though... Fiore del Libere have a lot of tecniqes that sets the opponent up for an attack (tempting him with a body part making him attack, then counter him).
> One last thing - how do you guys handle encumberance for
> beasts of burden and larger then man bipeds. The rules and
> the errata are both equally as confusing
Do you have the "coloseum" booklet? I do and there are some interesting fategue and enc. rules, it's just that I don't think they're tuned the right way. (I never liked the Idea that four horses could pull a heavier chariot than a single Triceratops or dragon...) I solved the problem with making entirely new enc. rules, and they're really exstensive, so I don't bother to post them unless somebody really wants to have a look. They cover any living creatures from mice to true dragons...
In short, I make up a third value, "Burden" The higer burden% you have, the higher sr do you get, and the slower becomes yur move rate. The burden% is calculated from your siz and str.
The fategue remains the same whatever you carry.
In addition, I add the consept of "habit rating" -how acustomed you're to an item.
So a dude in full plate wouldn't start off at minus 8 fategue. In my rules he'd start on his fategue at max (f.exs 30), but his move rate might be lowered to 2, and his sr would have perhaps a +2 penalty.
If he trotted the world with his full plate for say 5 years, he'd gradually get used to it's discomfort, and mabye get a moverate of 2,5 and the sr penalty on +1
|
Message threads
| Topic: |
Author: |
Time: |
|
|
|
Peter Beirne
|
24.02.2003 20:23
|
|
|
|
Bjorn Are Stolen
|
24.02.2003 23:20
|
|
|
|
Peter Beirne
|
25.02.2003 07:37
|
|
|
|
Bjorn Are Stolen
|
26.02.2003 02:32
|
|
|
|
Peter Beirne
|
26.02.2003 17:16
|
|
|
|
Tom Cantine
|
15.03.2003 01:11
|
|
|
|
Bjorn Are Stolen
|
17.03.2003 22:23
|
|
|
|
Tom Cantine
|
19.03.2003 05:40
|
|
|
|
Bjorn Are Stolen
|
19.03.2003 12:06
|
|
For any questions or comments about this site,
contact the webmaster
www.runequest.za.org is hosted by
www.wack.co.za
W&C Information Consultants CC
|
|
|
