[Runequest] Runequest Digest, Vol 30, Issue 25

Bjørn Are Stølen stolenbjorn at hotmail.com
Tue Nov 23 09:30:26 EST 2010


I still use the fumble-rules. So no matter how lousy your opponent is, you are allways perfectly capable of screwing up stuff :)
I'm actually home from WMA-class today, and as I was teaching a beginner parrying-principles, I decided to be very obvious and overdo the movements. Result: I managed to hit myself in the head with my own sword.... So fumbles are allways a funny addition to a combat system. I allso allow for criticals. During one round, both contestants gets one roll each, not one roll pr. turn of combat. So both could get criticals (I think I decided those would cansel eachother out), one can crit and the other fumble, or both can fumble. The advantage IMO with my system is that you don't have to decide what penalties you get when you want to aim, aiming is a reward you can "shop" if you earn it, much as it is in real combat; it's only when you've managed to out-manouver the opponent you get the luxury of aiming. I've never been able to aim on beforehand, and having much chanse of hitting there. But when I manage to seize the initiative, press the opponent on defence, when the enemy does somthing remarkably stupid or if I manage to do a technique particularily well (like an elbow push that spins my opponent around so he's having his back towards me) -only then can I aim. The aiming itself is peace of cake, it's the setting up for the kill that is the difficult bit. IMO it's a bit like playing chess, to do the chehk-mate-move itself is probably somthing even a 4year old can do, it's the winning that is the difficult part.
 
But I'm not saying that my system is perfect, there are many weaknesses with it, like:
*several vs. one opponent
*different weapons facing eachother, range, etc.
*I've allso been thinking hard on wether wrestling should be integrated into "fight" as well, as wrestling is the fundament and 100% integrated into the sword, spear and dagger-sections of all medieval martial manuals that have survived since the medieval/renissanse period. THis is a neglected aspect of all fantasy roleplay-rules.
 


Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2010 16:05:45 -0600
From: styopa1 at gmail.com
To: runequest at rpgreview.net
Subject: Re: [Runequest] Runequest Digest, Vol 30, Issue 25


2010/11/22 Bjørn Are Stølen <stolenbjorn at hotmail.com>


Personally, I've made house-rules where you drop "dodge", "parry" and "attack" as separate skills, you simply have "fight". Fighters then roll opposed rolls inspired by the resistance-table in RQ3, and the margin of success on your opponent (say both have same skill, you then have 50 - 50%, if you roll-say 10, you have a margin of success by 40. If your opponent roll 60, that's a +10, with a total margin of success of 50) determines how much fluff you can impose on your victim. Suggestions of options is given a margin of success-value that the winning-player can choose. The ability to aim is one of those options.




So would you roll one roll per round, with that including both players "attacks" and resolved essentially simultaneously, or on each of their actions do they get an "attack" resisted vs the opponent's "fight"?


If you have an expert against a novice - say 120% vs 20%, there's no conceivable way the novice can get lucky?
 
_______________________________________________ Runequest mailing list Runequest at rpgreview.net http://rpgreview.net/mailman/listinfo/runequest_rpgreview.net 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rpgreview.net/pipermail/runequest_rpgreview.net/attachments/20101122/22a15e70/attachment.html>


More information about the Runequest mailing list