[smascrns]

Originally Posted by Ranyart Finn

What purpose do characteristics serve in RQ/BRP derivatives like Elric or CoC - save for the characteristic rolls (which are there for exceptions, rather than the norm)?
... they act as an immediate key for the player to see that his character is tough, tall, fast, dumb, ugly, etc. All very important meta factors in roleplaying. They therefore have a use beyond the straight game mechanics.

That's fluff, crome, description, whatever you want to call it. Yes, that's a very important thing, but it does not need to be translated into game rules and stats. Just ask the player to describe his character in whatever terms he wants.

Second they determine the starting values of all skills. RQ3 diluted that with the category modifiers and arbitary starting %ages. You also needed a separate set of starting %ages to reflect racial differences and competencies. In MRQ, that's built right into the mechanic.

Agreed. In concept MRQ inherited this from previous editions of the game, but I'm also of the opinion that it simplified it and that's good.

Third, if you got rid of the characteristics altogether, as, say HeroQuest has done, there'd be all hell let loose from people saying 'But it ain't RQ!' and a whole other camp saying 'That's a HQ rip-off'!

Certainly. But this has nothing to do with what I was discussing in my review and that's the game system purpose of a particular stat. I'm not interested in this kind of fan vs. fan confrontation.
Of course and as I said before, the main reason for the characteristics in both RQ and MRQ is to determine the attributes. But these could be calculated directly.
RQ had two more purposes: Characteristic rolls and - most important from my perspective - modifiers to advancement rolls.

The GMs Guide for MRQ factors in weapon reach, opening and closing, and so forth. I know this doesn't help your review Sergio, but just to mention that its on the way in.

Oh, another weird editorial decision on the part of Mongoose... No, it doesn't help my review, these things should be in the players book(s).

A clever fighter doesn't just rely on instinct. He uses his brains to analyse options, openings, weaknesses, and so forth.

That's why I say that it would make more sense to have INT influencing the number of actions per round instead of the SR. Besides, your reasoning means a non-intelligent creature is disadvantaged when facing an intelligent one when there are creatures that can beat an human in terms of simple strike velocity; and it goes counter a good deal of fiction and everyday experience where you find guys with the brains of a child that are fast fighters.

He watches an opponent's stance and body language to assess the point to make his move

But SR is not about this. It's about what happens once the character has made up his mind and decided to strike.

I know several experienced SCA fighters and they all use their brain as well as their skill with weapons - if not more so.

I did Judo and Tae Kwon do, and I read many Medieval, Renaissance and fictional combat descriptions and I also think that intelligence has something to do with the ability to fight effectively. There's a name to that something, though: Experience, skill. My problem with MRQ is that it factored INT into the wrong thing. And the reason is simple: MRQ dropped the link between skills and characteristics - or else, reduced it into just the determination of the initial value of the skills.

If we applied your logic above, it would be the fast but dumb fighters who strike first more often than not - and they will, if they have a really high DEX - but please, INT IS important in Strike Rank. You're mistaken to downplay it.

My logic is not that, sorry. My logic (and I state it in the review) is that SR are not something independent of skill. My logic is that it does not make sense to have an unskilled character with high SR and a very skilled one with low SR. It is that INT should influence skill progression, and that skill should influence SR. That's my logic. It is useless for me to state how I think it should translate into RQ or MRQ rules, though.