[Rq-rules] Heresy: D&D concepts in RQ?

[Peter Brink]

Peter Maranci skrev:
> 
> It's based on the Power Attack and Expertise feats. I took them both for a
> new character, and was surprised to realize how much flexibility they gave
> me in combat. Now, the feat concept *itself* sucks - 

The concept of binary skills aren't that bad. There are many kinds of 
experience that a character may either have or not have that makes sense 
to portray in a similar way to feats. You could for example simplify the 
RQIII encumbrance system by using the rules of RQII combined with a 
binary skill called "Armour Proficiency". If you have it there are no 
negative mods when fighting in armour, otherwise there is.

> is it really true that MRQ has feat-like rules? - 

 From what I've read on the net they do... (I don't own MRQ).

> but the idea of being able to trade off
> chance-to-hit to increase defense, or to increase damage, actually makes
> some sense to me. My combat experience is limited to boffers in LARPs, but
> it seems to me that both concepts would map pretty well to reality.
> 
> So perhaps it should be possible to sacrifice up to 1/10th of your attack
> skill and add it directly to your parry or Dodge. Or to trade the chance of
> attack skill success for additional points of damage, on a 5% or 10% to 1
> point of damage ratio.
> 

This is one situation where a binary skill is handy. Either you know how 
to fight defensively or you don't, if you do you can move up to 20 
percentiles from your attack skill to your parry skill. Disarm, trip, 
break weapon etc. can be treated in similar ways.

/Peter Brink