Jump to content

GianniVacca

Member
  • Posts

    704
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Posts posted by GianniVacca

  1. Just to show you how different people are, there were people who thought the whole system should have been based more on something like the resistance table than the skill rolls.

    I also prefer the Resistance Table but I guess its removal was a design decision for Mongoose RQ which got carried over to RQ6.

  2. According to Sara's Facebook she's busy writing (she recently mentioned the full redraft of the CoFE novel) both fiction and RPG stuff, albeit a lot of rthe later is for FATE rather than BRP...

    She regularly posts updates about her writing on G+

  3. There were several in Italian: Egitto (already mentioned), West, Dinosauri, all as stand-alone supplements to Basic (Italian version of BRP, larger than the 1980s BRP booklet but way slimmer than thr BGB). And then there was an Alien (as in the films) special issue of a rpg magazine that was almost as long as the stand-alone supplements. I own them all.

    In French there also was a rpg similar to the Italian Basic, called BaSIC. It had two settings within the booklet (one mediaeval, one contemporary), and there was a stand-alone supplement set in the 17th century. They also published an Arabian nights setting as a pull-out centre section of a rpg magazine some years later. I also own these.

    I know there was a Swedish translation of WoW (or of Magic World?) called Drakar och Demoner.

  4. It depends on whether you are looking for a "tool set" kind of rules, or not. If you're looking for the former, then use Chaosium's BRP; if you're looking for the latter, then choose MRQII-Legend/RuneQuest/OpenQuest depending on your budget (they are quite similar). If you are not planning to play in Glorantha, keep your Legend PDF. That should enable you to play in your own setting.

  5. I started playing D&D because a friend of mine stumbled in a red box in a family-oriented games shop. But it was 1985 and D&D was at the peak of its worldwide popularity.

    The fact is that no single system seems to be at the peak of its popularity these days. Heck, even D&D is divided into more sub-churches than Christianity.

  6. I have played both RQ and HQ extensively, and for me the major difference is in the way equipment and items are managed. In RQ, if two warriors have both Sword 90% but one of them has no armour and the other one wears a full plate, you know which one is going to survive :)

    In HQ, if two warriors have Bad-Ass Warrior 4W1 and one of them has Full Plate Armour 17, the outcome is not that obvious. The armour may give an augment, but then the other player can probably augment with some other skill (Hate Lunars or Fight to the Death or Initiate of Humakt) and the fight will be even.

    So (independently from power level) I'd recommend RQ to players to whom equipment matters, and HQ to players who just like to come up with good ideas (which translate in bonuses) during play. Also HQ handles high level play better but is not necessarily restricted to that kind of gaming.

×
×
  • Create New...