*** JUNK MAIL ***RE: [Rq-rules] Thanks!

[grogthing]

I still say that skil rates higher in the equasion
than weapon size.

The weapon does modify the percentages at certian
distances.

Why not a sr system where higher is better....sr
equals skill with weapon....skill is already midified
by dex so dex is accounted for....then a % bonus or
penalty for the weapon based on what range you are
at?....then add a d6? randomizer for situation and
whala....a realistic system where the most skilled
opponant with the logest weapon generally does stike
first....but a highly skilled opponent with a shorted
weapon..can get past a less skilled opponent with a
longer weapon.

Greg

--- Bjorn Stolen <stolenbjorn at hotmail.com> wrote:

> If I seem worked up, it's perhaps because this is a
> topic I actually have an oppinion on. Sue me if that
> displeases you.
> Let's take your situation 1, can you name any
> roleplaygame that solves this situation
> realitically? -or mentions it in particular? I've
> never played one as far as I know. I still think
> that the original system would cover it. I''ve been
> fighting in lines, and somthing that often occurs,
> is that someone with a short weapon gets stabbed by
> a speardude that is situated next to the one that
> the stabbed one tries to spearhunt. If the
> neighbouring speardude is too far away, or is
> entangled in a fight of his own, the story might be
> different, but IMHO, the stanard RQ3 rules covers it
> reasonably as far as realism is conserned.
> Your example 2 seems to show a different
> understanding of the consept of sr and reach of
> weapons. You don't like the predictability of a long
> weapon acting before a slow weapon. IMHO, the system
> only grants the weapon with the longest reach the
> option of acting first; it's by no means a guarantee
> that it actually will do so. That is up to the skill
> of the wielder of the weapon (and his dex and siz
> sr) Take an ectreeme example: Say you stand in a
> street with an M16 rifle. 100 yards away, some
> arabic fanatic starts charging you with his dagger.
> You get to shoot several times at him before he's at
> striking-distance, because an M16 have longer reach
> (and lower SR) than a dagger (sr3) but that doesn't
> mean that you'll automatically kill him. You still
> have to actually hit him. It's the same in melee,
> only with smaller margins of error. If you and I
> were to fight, had similar body stats, and you were
> unarmed and I had a spear, i still had to plug you
> with the spear in order to end the fight. But if we
> leave skill%'s aside and only regards SR (reach)
> -don't tell me that your fist would be on my nose
> earlier than my spearhead would be in your guts.
> 
> 
> Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2007 12:20:00 -0500From:
> styopa1 at gmail.comTo: rq-rules at crashbox.comSubject:
> Re: [Rq-rules] Thanks!On 10/19/07, Bjorn Stolen
> <stolenbjorn at hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> You critisize the illogic of the SR because the
> longsword gets to act first. Sorry, mac, but that's
> how things are in real life. You could of course
> make a system that is not based on realism. You can
> of course parry/dodge and then attack with the
> dagger, and nothing in the RQ3-system prevents you
> from doing that.   In some circomstanses the shorter
> weapon gets to strike first WHICH IS ALLSO COVERED
> IN THE SR-SYSTEM!!! (like when legionares use huge
> shields and short gladiuses to slash/stab in very
> cramped space, where spearmen are unable to use the
> advantage of better reach. So you may say that the
> SR rules in RQ3 do not pleace you, but you cannot
> say that they're not realistic.I've been doing WMA
> for 5 years, so I think I know what I'm talking
> about.
>  
> I'm not sure if I understand your last point, but I
> think it's importaint that both GM and player(s)
> understands what is meant with a low sr-weapon. A
> halebard have a low sr, but that doesn't mean that
> it is a lightening weapon capable of allways hitting
> first on default; it  depends on the wielder's
> ability to actually use it the way it's meant. If
> it's used wrongly, you'll loose the first
> hit-ability (perhaps that's why the base skill of a
> halebard is only 5%; an attempt to balance out it's
> high damage pool and low sr? -still realistic IMHO
> (and I've been fighting with halebards too; not in
> the USA'an SCA-system, but in the european
> Haerkamp-system.)Not sure why you seem to be quite
> so "worked up" over this.1) It's covered in the SR
> system, albeit POORLY.  The rules only state that
> once a shorter-weaponed character closes with a
> longer-weaponed character, the shorter-weaponed
> character gets to "strike first, regardless of SR". 
> Well THAT'S vague in ANY situation other than the
> simplest one:one combat - if the daggerman has
> closed with the pikeman, and the other pikeman wants
> to help his buddy, who goes first - the distant
> pikeman or the daggerman?  The other pikeman has a
> lower SR than the daggerman, but the daggerman gets
> to go before his target regardless of SR - when does
> the dagger land? 2) my main beef, which I presented
> admittedly poorly, is the absolute predictability of
> combat.  That's why I prefer a semi randomized
> result, because I don't like my players saying
> things like "I have a melee SR of 4 and his is 7, I
> know that 100% I'll be able to move 6m and STILL
> swing before him".  I've only been in HTH combat
> perhaps a dozen times in my life, and only thrice
> where I believed my life was seriously on the line
> (and only one of those with multiple combatants on
> both sides which would be the most frequent
> situation in RQ combat in my experience).  It was
> ANYTHING but mechanistic, and if you've been doing
> WMA for 5 years I'd imagine you'd agree. The more I
> think about it, I'd also consider strongly a benefit
> to SR based on user skill ... which goes to my point
> regarding the wrong-scaledness of the SR
> system...the fact that after a certain point, one
> can be certain that there is NOBODY in the world
> faster with weapon X.  Again, I dislike such
> system-enforced certainty in the minds of my
> players. 
>
_________________________________________________________________
> Discover the new Windows Vista
>
http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista&mkt=en-US&form=QBRE>
_______________________________________________
> RQ-Rules mailing list
> RQ-Rules at crashbox.com
> http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules
> 


"I have sworn, upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every
form of tyranny over the mind of man." - Thomas Jefferson

"It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." - Thomas Jefferson

"Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" - Patrick Henry

"A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious." - Aristotle