<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)">
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.apple-style-span
{mso-style-name:apple-style-span;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Do you handle STR bonuses any differently with this ruleset?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>
runequest-bounces@rpgreview.net [mailto:runequest-bounces@rpgreview.net] <b>On
Behalf Of </b>Vile<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Saturday, December 11, 2010 4:30 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> runequest@rpgreview.net<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Runequest] Is weapon damage too high?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>On 11 December 2010 09:00, <span
class=apple-style-span><b><span style='font-size:13.5pt'>Bjørn Are Stølen</span></b></span> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span class=apple-style-span><span style='font-size:13.5pt;
font-family:"Courier New"'>IMO the damage-issue in RQ(3) suffers from not
introducing armor-piercing-rules. In my setting, I tried to introduse slashing,
piercing and blunt-damage values, and having the armor allso having different
AP vs. theese different attack-types, a chainmail for instance would protect
some 10 ap against slashing, 1 ap against bashing and perhaps 5 ap against
thrusts.</span></span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>I have tackled this problem (armour penetration vs. damage
transfer) in firearms (where the issue is much worse than for melee or
primitive missile weaponry) by introducing an armour penetration bonus (pen.).
Basically, some weapons ignore a certain amount of armour before their damage
is reduced.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>For example, a bullet might have a pen. of 5 and a damage of
1D4. It strikes a target wearing 6-point armour and the damage roll is 3. The
bullet ignores the first 5 armour points, then loses 1 point of damage to the
remaining armour point, doing 2 points of damage to the target. If the target
had been unarmoured, he or she would still only have suffered 3 points of
damage. Without the pen. value, if weapon damage had been, e.g. 1D10, an
unarmoured target would clearly be affected to a much greater degree, which is
unrealistic in this case because much of the kinetic energy would have simply
"blown through".<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>This is by no means intended to be a perfect simulation. But
it has worked flawlessly over many years of gaming in introducing a much
greater variety of weapons without making everything past a certain point into
a "one-shot-overkill" weapon.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>This rule could be extended to primitive weapons, e.g.
stiletto: pen. 2, damage 1D4.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>You can see this rule applied in more detail in my
Traveller/RuneQuest weapons tables uploaded to the Basic Roleplaying Central
website: <a href="http://basicroleplaying.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=109">http://basicroleplaying.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=109</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>