[Runequest] RQ 6 Failed Athletics

Styopa styopa1 at gmail.com
Fri Sep 12 13:33:09 EST 2014


I think part of the 'golf bag of skills' thing comes from the finite nature
of the check-system.  If you get a check, then no amount of subsequent use
"helps" you, in the sense of potential improvement.  So players are
incentivized to switch to something else that they can improve.
What my players like very much (and it's derailed 100% of the 'no, you
can't just stab rats for a skill check' thing) is our house rule:
Success or a fumble (ooh, don't do THAT again!) gets you a check, special 2
checks, crit 3 checks.  That's how many times you get to roll against the
skill for improvement in the next skill-check opportunity.  Once you have a
check, subsequent results give you tick marks (1, 2, or 3).  (If you
already have a single check, and get a crit, it's increased to 3 checks, it
doesn't give you ticks then.)  Those tick-marks can be spent by the player
either pre-roll to increase the chance to fail (ie get a skill check) 1:1.
 If they don't spend them for that, then they can use them 10 ticks:+1 on
the benefit of a successful skill roll.  In any case, when one does the
skill checks, all accumulated checks/ticks are obliterated.
Yes, it accelerates skill growth a little, but I'm not averse to that
either.  It's still bloody hard to increase past 100% so (shrug).

On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 5:20 PM, Steve Perrin <steve.perrin at gmail.com>
wrote:

>  These days, I hand out Experience Points (somewhere between 3 and 5 as a
> rule) and you can spend a point to get an Experience roll against a Skill
> you have checked. If unsuccessful, you can spend another point to roll for
> the same skill, but that expends a point. Once a skill has increased, that
> check gets erased, but you can save a check for several games before
> finally using a point to try to increase.
>
> You can also spend Experience Points (in various numbers) to gain talents
> or increases in characteristics, so sometimes points are saved for that
> purpose.
>
> In games I have played with Mac McMahon (now, alas, gone from us) as GM he
> would let you roll if you had 5 checks on a skill. This lets you either
> spread your experience widely or focus on special skills.
>
> Both methods tend to reduce check shopping as a regular activity.
>
> Steve Perrin
>
> On 9/11/2014 5:53 AM, Lawrence Whitaker wrote:
>
>  It that's true for you then consider yourself fortunate.
>
>  Seems I've been lucky. As I said, I've certainly seen debates, but never
> especially nasty ones.
>
> For certain gamers of a min/max mindset, skill checks are equivalent the
> much coveted Experience Points in certain other games, sometimes provoking
> a most unseemly desperation to use every skill in just about every game
> session in order to get the skill checks.
>
>  Oh, I don't doubt it happens! The Golf Bag of Weapons syndrome is
> infamous... :)
>
> I've grown to the perspective that skill increase checks should probably
> be meted out by the GM rather than *automatically* generated by the
> player's actions (note that I say "player's" rather than "character's"
> intentionally).
>
>  I completely agree. There are many arguments for GM control over how
> many improvement rolls characters receive and I do think they out-trump a
> lot of the arguments for the old Skill Ticks for Successful use arguments.
> But I don't want to get into such arguments here. I (and RQ6) agrees with
> you though.
>
> On 11 September 2014 08:44, Stephen Posey <stephenlposey at earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Lawrence Whitaker
>> Sent: Sep 11, 2014 8:03 AM
>> To: RuneQuest Rules
>> Subject: Re: [Runequest] RQ 6 Failed Athletics
>>
>>  Thank you for saying that. I have recently been involved in a discussion
>>> with some very unpleasant people on a different forum (which I left as a
>>> result) who were in absolute denial about this, claiming that every test
>>> of a skill in RuneQuest requires a skill roll (and that skill checks
>>> where
>>> the only way to gain experience).
>>
>>
>>  Wow... that's...
>>
>>  Fortunately I've rarely come across such close-mindedness within the RQ
>> tribe. I know that the Skill Check method of experience has its adherents,
>> but I've never come across any especially *nasty* arguments over either
>> when to roll or X is better than Y for experience. You did the right thing
>> by walking away.
>>
>> It that's true for you then consider yourself fortunate.
>>
>> For certain gamers of a min/max mindset, skill checks are equivalent the
>> much coveted Experience Points in certain other games, sometimes provoking
>> a most unseemly desperation to use every skill in just about every game
>> session in order to get the skill checks.
>>
>> I've grown to the perspective that skill increase checks should probably
>> be meted out by the GM rather than *automatically* generated by the
>> player's actions (note that I say "player's" rather than "character's"
>> intentionally)..
>>
>> Stephen Posey
>> stephenlposey at earthlink.net
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Runequest mailing list
>> Runequest at rpgreview.net
>> http://mail.rpgreview.net/mailman/listinfo/runequest_rpgreview.net
>>
>>
>
>
>  --
> Will there be time enough and World for me to sing that song?
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Runequest mailing listRunequest at rpgreview.nethttp://mail.rpgreview.net/mailman/listinfo/runequest_rpgreview.net
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Runequest mailing list
> Runequest at rpgreview.net
> http://mail.rpgreview.net/mailman/listinfo/runequest_rpgreview.net
>
>


-- 
-Steve
(my personal email)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.rpgreview.net/pipermail/runequest_rpgreview.net/attachments/20140911/166f8bc5/attachment.html>


More information about the Runequest mailing list