[Rq-rules] Latest details on MRQ

[Tom Cantine]

Well, I agree that you don't need to have an official set of tables for 
all those bonuses, but to use SOME kind of bonus or penalty is 
something I place considerable value upon, especially for characters 
who are of beginning to moderate skill levels. Whether those numbers 
are chosen because they feel right or because they're in the rulebook 
is of admittedly lesser importance. However, there's something to be 
said for a published baseline from which one can get a sense of what 
feels right.


On 24-May-06, at 2:03 AM, Ashley Munday wrote:

> Nope, not kidding at all. The interaction between the
> attack and parry gives you plenty to hang onto to
> describe what's happening without slowing things down.
> You might as well play HQ with a shed load of
> undescribed augments.
>
> If you're going to modify an attack chance just pull
> some number out of the air that feels right, don't sod
> about with all that "Well, he's on the ground so I get
> +20%, It's dusk so I get -15%" Boring, boring,
> boring... if you want all that go play a wargame.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Ash
>
> --- Tom Cantine <tcantine at incentre.net> wrote:
>
>> You kidding? I used those modifiers every chance I
>> could!
>>
>> On 23-May-06, at 10:16 AM, Ashley Munday wrote:
>>
>>> Not that RQ ever had a lot of maths in the combat
>>> system anyway. Most people didn't bother adding
>> any
>>> modifiers: about the only addition and subtraction
>> was
>>> for damage.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Ash
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> RQ-Rules mailing list
>>> RQ-Rules at crashbox.com
>>> http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> RQ-Rules mailing list
>> RQ-Rules at crashbox.com
>> http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> RQ-Rules mailing list
> RQ-Rules at crashbox.com
> http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules
>