[Runequest] RQ6 questions... again

Styopa styopa1 at gmail.com
Sun Jan 27 15:49:39 EST 2013


FWIW I can give you my opinions from the experience we had with the rules
so far - similar to yours, I'm 45 and was almost more concerned that I
would have trouble adapting than my (16-20yr old) players.

Frankly it was a little nerve wracking to think 'here I go into a new rules
system that I wouldn't know backwards and forwards'...but hey, life is
change, right?  My main motivation to get my sorry butt out of my comfort
zone was the (lack of) portability of my own rules.   Sure, I was very
happy with the RQ3+umpteen houserules, but the problem was that when my
players would go out into the world, they might convince someone else to
try it to the point where they'd ask "so, where can I get these rules?".
 Uh oh.  Firstly, RQ3 is fairly hard to find, then the 30+ pages of house
rules etc are simply unduplicateable, except by copying my crummy notes.

Anyway, RQ6 is a fresh and shiny new system, with some tested paradigms
coming from MRQ.

1.  When making characters, did players right away clearly see what they
were getting when they chose fighting styles?  Or does it take a little
practice for players to see how the various styles will work out "in the
field"?
ANSWER: Yes, they actually enjoyed it.  My players very much liked the
intent of bringing those skills together.  We used it as a point of
discussion during character creation to say "ok, here's your background,
what weapon sets would it make sense that this character has?"  Some were
formal, like soldiers, with clear sets.  Some others were thugs so they had
a broader if slightly less martial choice.  Combat style traits was where I
really tried to give them an option or two: you're a thug, so you could
take hidden weapons OR throwing weapons.  They seemed to get into it easily.

2.  When making a character, do players feel that they have to make a
choice between character types they want and fighting styles their party
wants?  (You know, like when joining a D&D game and the party asks you to
take a cleric.)  Or does this never come up?
ANSWER: never an issue for us.  Characters had lots of choices.

3.  When in melee, do different players feel equally happy with their
chosen fighting styles?
ANSWER: largely, yes.

4.  I read that, depending on fighting style, a character might have either
two or three Action Points.  If that is so, then how does that work out in
melee combat?  Do your players find the difference between 2 and 3 action
points to be significant?  And, when judging what sorts of antagonists to
throw at the party, does the GM need to think carefully about how many
action points the bad guys will have, or is it not such a big deal in your
planning?
ANSWER: mechanically already answered.  The difference between 2 and 3 AP
is HUGE (basically a 3 ap vs 2 ap gets a free undefended attack each
round!)...however, while I had trouble with this, I ultimately "figured it
out": firstly, I strongly encourage players to design their characters so
as to have 3 ap, for sure.  Second, the 3/2 split is so big, the '2 ap for
minions' really works well, without what I'd call the absolute silliness
about minion-grade enemies in D&D4.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rpgreview.net/pipermail/runequest_rpgreview.net/attachments/20130126/bd2cac8e/attachment.html>


More information about the Runequest mailing list