[Runequest] RQ6 simulationist question
mason.bruce at gmail.com
Tue Jan 22 01:52:22 EST 2013
Yeah MRQ1/MRQII/RQ6 is now much more like a wounds system than a HP one.
Minor wound: no noticeable effect on ability to fight but more at risk.
Serious wound: temporary degradation of ability or full or partial
incapacity (depending on location and Endurance rolls)
Major wound: incapacitation or (imminent) death
As your Endurance roll is affected by the skill of the attacker who just
wounded you, highly skilled combatants are more likely to cause a crippling
serious wound than lower skilled ones.
It's a pretty nice little system with all sorts of nice nooks and crannies.
On 21 January 2013 14:34, Tomas Björklund <tomas.g.bjorklund at gmail.com>wrote:
> >> Hit points, however you use them, like D&D in one big pool, or like RQ
> segmentet by
> >> body location, is not a good model of how a body reacts to wounds. Even
> though the
> >> RQ systems have some add-ons that deal with severed and incapacitated
> body parts,
> >> which is an improvement.
> > It is worth noting that, in RQ6, no one ever dies purely of hit
> point loss, because
> > there are no general hit points. You either die from a Major Wound (so
> taking a lot of
> > damage in a specific location, or from blood loss or some other factor
> like poison or
> Indeed, and it is a good step in the right direction, in my view. I
> remember when I first read the RQ6 rules and suddenly realized you had done
> away with the "pool" of Hit points. It was one of those "ahh, nicely done"
> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 3:12 PM, David Cake <dave at difference.com.au>wrote:
>> On 19/01/2013, at 7:49 PM, lev at rpgreview.net wrote:
>> >> Real hand to hand combat, whether bare handed, with blade or or
>> weapons is
>> >> a very fluid and dynamic affair, with a lot of things going on
>> >> simultaneously, both mentally and physically. Not something that is
>> >> captured by game rules, and I think that a truer simulation would lead
>> >> a
>> >> quite complex pen and paper game system. Especially if you want to
>> >> the concurrency in a real fight.
>> > I think it's pretty clear that RQ6 is a more simulationist set of combat
>> > rules and indeed, it is explicitly orientated to do that. RQ3 is
>> > deliberately and openly more abstract.
>> I think RQ3 is an explicitly detailed and simulationist set of
>> rules, just not as good at it, as fun or as interesting as RQ6. I don't
>> think that in any way makes it more abstract. If anything, RQ3 is often
>> less abstract (ie specific weapon skills rather than 'combat styles'), it
>> just puts a lot of the detail in the wrong places.
>> On 20/01/2013, at 2:38 AM, Tomas Björklund <tomas.g.bjorklund at gmail.com>
>> > Hit points, however you use them, like D&D in one big pool, or like RQ
>> segmentet by body location, is not a good model of how a body reacts to
>> wounds. Even though the RQ systems have some add-ons that deal with severed
>> and incapacitated body parts, which is an improvement.
>> It is worth noting that, in RQ6, no one ever dies purely of hit
>> point loss, because there are no general hit points. You either die from a
>> Major Wound (so taking a lot of damage in a specific location, or from
>> blood loss or some other factor like poison or magic.
>> Runequest mailing list
>> Runequest at rpgreview.net
> Runequest mailing list
> Runequest at rpgreview.net
The art is pretending it's art, the question is do you need soup.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Runequest