Some magic questions, among others

[Mike Holmes]

Nice description, Nick. Welcome to the Forge.

One of the things that's really neat about how the system works is that it isn't binary. That is, things that are traditionally handled as binary have to be handled in other ways, which just enriches them, IMO.

Take Rolemaster. It's system actually describes partial success, and near success for skills, but makes all magic an all or nothing event with resistance rolls. Why not have partial success on spells, too? HQ enables this. So Vroltar the Hairy Mage casts his spell of Paralysis on you? Well, if he only grazes you with the beam, perhaps only your foot is affected. Leading to that -1 effect. In other systems it's all or nothing.

Note that the "all" effect can still occur, however. You can roll well enough to paralyze your opponent in one shot. It's just difficult. By putting all powers on the same scale, however, you balance them as well as possible. So no longer do you have to worry about the "is the wizard of the fighter the better option?" question. With HQ, it's the one with the higher Ability. Period. Making coming up with opponent's of the appropriate power simplicity itself.

Mike

[kalyptein]

its OK to think in terms of modifiers and not just straight forward AP number crunching and that this meant the jointly agreed narrative, which is what we use to agree on the modifiers, has a massive affect on the odds. (Hope that makes sense).

So if in a combat one person has a spear and the other is trying to grapple, and the grappler scores a big win, the narrative might run something like he closes in and grabs him.  Then the next turn the spearman might have to attack with grappling or some kind of agility trait to get free, instead of being able to use his Spear Fighting.  But if the spearman had gotten the better of the situation, the grappler might have a big penalty to his grappling attacks, since he is being kept at spear's length and his attacks represent trying to close in without getting skewered.  Am I following you?

Alex

[dunlaing]

Another magical situation I was wondering about: How would you handle something like a petrification spell (assuming a mage good enough to get by the increased resistance for transforming someone)?  In an extended contest I'd assume you keep "missing" your target until he runs out of AP and finally gets tagged.  

That is a good way of running a contest, but another good way of running a contest could be to allow the mage to use his petrification spell as an Unrelated Action, resolving it with a Simple Contest. This is more powerful but also more dangerous. If he got a complete success, his target would be completely turned to stone in one shot.

If you were to run it as AP bids, instead of miss, miss, miss, zap, you might want to run it by narrating either a progressive petrification (you're feeling much stiffer now...) or even as an incremental petrification (your left hand turns to stone). I like the sound of the incremental one because a crafty PC could use the stone hand against his opponent.

But petrification is pretty binary, you're rock or you aren't.  How would that work if you get less than a Complete Victory?  Or is this kind of save-or-die magic just not something appropriate to Glorantha?  Would it be sensible to say you're petrified, but it wears off in a few hours on a Minor Victory?  It does leave you worse off after a fight than a normal I-got-wounded result would, but you're if you're defeated by an enemy, you're pretty much at their mercy anyway, right?

Alex

If you don't want to go wiht incremental petrification or progressive petrification, I'd say it's fair to make the character turn to stone on a minor defeat, but have it wear off and have the after-effects be the equivalent of Impairment. Sort of like Han Solo in Return of the Jedi wasn't quite up to snuff in the battle after he was unfrozen.

[NickHollingsworth]

its OK to think in terms of modifiers and not just straight forward AP number crunching and that this meant the jointly agreed narrative, which is what we use to agree on the modifiers, has a massive affect on the odds. (Hope that makes sense).

So if in a combat one person has a spear and the other is trying to grapple, and the grappler scores a big win, the narrative might run something like he closes in and grabs him.  Then the next turn the spearman might have to attack with grappling or some kind of agility trait to get free, instead of being able to use his Spear Fighting.  But if the spearman had gotten the better of the situation, the grappler might have a big penalty to his grappling attacks, since he is being kept at spear's length and his attacks represent trying to close in without getting skewered.

Yep. At least thats how we do it. And I think its how its meant to be done.

If the spearman gets a big win the grappler's AP drop a lot. The nature of the contest probably doesn't change 'cos (1) the spearman is trying to mantain the status quo and (2) it was the grappler that was the active party.

If the grappler wins then not only does the spearman's AP drop but the nature of the contest changes in the grapplers favour.
However, I would still allow the spearman to use his Fight With Spear because its not a narrow Stab At Opponent Exactly 6 Foot Away With Spear skill; it will inlude 'throwing an opponent off your spear ' and even 'biting the nose of someone holding your spear' as well as 'telling how much a spear is worth', 'picking the best spear', 'carrying a spear without knocking things over', and even 'generally looking like you can take care of yourself'. These, and an infinite number of other things could all be improvised from Fight With Spear. And in this situation I would personally only give a small modifier to the spearman anyway, on the grounds that coping with people grabbing your spear is part and parcel of being a spearman.

The grappler, if he wins, is getting a double whammy. But I would require the size of the grapplers AP bid to match the risk he is taking in trying to grab the spear and so change the contest.

How much is a fair AP bid? And how much is a fair modifier? Well that just depends on the situation thats been described in the joint narrative. Perhaps the GM will decide. Perhaps the other player(s) will argue differently and everyone will compromise. Its a very improvisational game and needs players to play because they enjoy the process of play rather than just 'winning'. Half of my mates that played 20 years of RuneQuest (which is in some ways its predecessor) hate it because it 'doesn't have proper rules' which might be partly because you cant open the book and lookup a rule that says how much skill loss you suffer from Spear Attack when someone grabs the spear. Personally I'm happier with that. Does it really matter exactly how much as long as we get on with the game and the story is entertaining.

[Mike Holmes]

Hey Nick, that's what we round here would call a classic GNS incoherence situation. In plain English, you and these other players you describe have fundamentally different views of how to make decisions in play. Neither is bad, but the frustration comes from not being able to see the other's POV. There's extensive theory here regarding that, which may be of some interest.

But it should suffice to say that HQ supports a very different mode of decision making. One that some players will love (because the game handles it so well), and that others won't like at all. That's not a statement against the game at all, it's just a fact that all games have to deal with.

As for you, Kalyptein, you're seeing something that, it seems, you've never dealt with before. It requires a very different mindset. The rules don't tell you what happen, just the results. It's up to the players to describe in as entertaining a way possible, just how the action got from the declaration of intent to the outcome that the dice show.

And this can be anything that the group is comfortable with. That is, if you want to describe the spearfight AP win as a small alien beaming down to grab the guy's spear while you then close, and then he smiles at you and beams back up, that's potentially suitable. Actually it won't fly for most games because they'll have a standard that requires a lot more plausibility. But there's nothing in the rules that say that the alien is illegal per se. It all depends on your group's standards.

So, think about that for a second. You only have to link the action to the Abilities used in such a way as the players "buy it". Outside of that, there are infinite descriptions of any potential success or failure roll.

Mike

[newsalor]

I'd handle petrification magic in a extented contest just as I would almost any other ability. If the other guy want's to make sure that his opponent is petrified, then a parting shot is in order. But, in the end, it's not about what I'd do, it's you campaign, you can do it the way that feels best.

[Wulf]

And this can be anything that the group is comfortable with. That is, if you want to describe the spearfight AP win as a small alien beaming down to grab the guy's spear while you then close, and then he smiles at you and beams back up, that's potentially suitable. Actually it won't fly for most games because they'll have a standard that requires a lot more plausibility. But there's nothing in the rules that say that the alien is illegal per se. It all depends on your group's standards.

I have a Shaman with a Wind Spirit with the ability "Grab Weapon Away", does that count?

Wulf

[Mike Holmes]

I can't say, though I'd doubt it. Plausibility will, again, be determined by the group.

But if you want to get experimental...

:-)

Mike

[NickHollingsworth]

... that's what we round here would call a classic GNS incoherence situation. ...you and these other players you describe have fundamentally different views of how to make decisions in play. ...

Actually we resolved it very easily. We dont play together any more. We do meet to play RuneQuest once in a blue moon and to do a Gloranthan LARP. But yes - much as I was a die-hard RuneQuest fan I now find it slow and obsessed with combat; while most of them either wont try HeroQuest or tried it but dont like it.

Unless, of course, its how I GM thats the problem. But lets not go there.

... There's extensive theory here regarding [GNS], ...

Seen it. Read it. Mulled it over. Bought Sorcerer. Played The Pool. Mulled it over some more.

As a result of The Pool have questions about narrative rights in HeroQuest. Should I take it to a new thread?.

[Wulf]

I can't say, though I'd doubt it. Plausibility will, again, be determined by the group.

...I'm the GM...

Wulf

[Ron Edwards]

Hi there,

I think this thread is pretty much done, unless the initial poster wants it to continue.

Nick, that is a great thread topic, whether for this forum or for RPG Theory or Actual Play, depending on what you'd like to emphasize.

Wulf, your one-line posts are obstructing the discussion. Can you phrase your points and inquiries into more complete form? Starting a new thread for this purpose would be ideal.

Best,
Ron

[kalyptein]

I'm pretty much done (for now...)  Thanks for all the suggestions and advice everyone.

Alex