TrippyHippy

Really after the full game - I like the models - but the delivery cost is astronomical to NZ apparently.

How much would it be with P&P? I was basically costed out of the Cthulhu Wars by the shipping.

So, we will see Personality traits as in Pendragon? Not really that radical, as it stands. Anything else?

What do the "ideas experimentally brought forth in Griffin Mountain" include?

I haven't run the new chase rules to be entirely honest. However, I never really felt the need for having more elaborate rules, beyond the movement rules that were already there in 6th Edition. The core of the Call of Cthulhu game experience for me, and the groups I've played in, is simply not centred that much on action sequences such as these. To me, it's a genuine confusion in the direction of the game - not insurmountable, I'll stress - but if you take a read through Horror on the Orient Express as the first official published CoC7E campaign, I ask you how many opportunities are there for elaborate chase mechanics? Indeed, of the potential pregens provided, how many would you regard as genuine combat heavy characters? So why have two whole chapters dedicated to combat and chases, respectively? Maybe things will be clearer with more publications - like Pulp Cthulhu, I guess.

The randomiser, a la D&D, doesn't need to be there for sure. I take issue with it anyway, as it required the GM to write down an order each time. If the speed is pre-calculated it streamlines the process. I do think that the option to shift your SR, in order to gain more control over hit location is a good one though. I could even see it being used to add to the accuracy of the shot in 5% increments also. Eg Add +2 to your SR for a +10% accuracy on your attack roll. This makes the fighting order less predictable, but also gives some tactical control to the players.

RQ2 is easier to understand for me.

Hmmmm.......I prefer Option 1.

The main thing I picked up as an extra idea in the RQ2 book, is the way in which you can delay SR standing in order to target HP locations more specifically. It's in the optional rules in the Appendix. Does this make it through to RQ3?

Reading between the lines, along with the statements made when the decision was made for a new edition being disassociated from RQ6, this is my guess.

The RQ3 Strike Rank rules always seemed a bit complicated to me. Not really sure why, and my current point of reference is the just BRP core rules so maybe it's just lost a bit in translation. However, on reading through RQ2, these seem pretty straightforward. I'm not really sure there is any real advantage to converting from 12 ranks to 10 either. I'd stick with the original rules.

Ducks - Average Size 54. P90

In the RQ2 book, I can't see any mention of this. It indicates that you can attack in a round, but the parry seems to have no stipulation. Does this mean you can parry against any incoming attack?

Sanity is based on the POW score, while Luck has been uncoupled in the latest edition. I disagree with that, and think it should be the other way round. Luck to me, and when it was first introduced in RQ/BRP, represents a latent POW of sorts, while Sanity is somewhat different to magical power. So I think that Luck should still be based on POW and Sanity should be independent of POW. With regards to the sexism issue, I actually run games for an all female gaming club (as an invited 'guest' referee) once every month or so. https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688492468050423/ Generally, I run Call of Cthulhu games and provide a bunch of pregens as required. Occasionally, someone wants to generate their own character. Personally, I wouldn't want to be the one that tells any of them that they have to take penalties to their Strength scores.....

Well, they did used to have adjustments such as these in AD&D (1st Edition). A number of people thought it was sexist and it was removed from subsequent editions. That's the rockiness I am referring to.

I think that women ted to manipulate their appearance more with make-up and so on, but I also think you're always going to heading for rocky waters if you start imposing sex-based adjustments on Characteristic scores. Personally, I prefer a simple points buy method to let players but characteristics where they want. Oh, and Luck would be still based on POW in my game, while Sanity is uncoupled to make it's own stat. Beyond that, it's more a case of ignoring certain rules rather than making new ones.

Q2 - On checking again, yes Zit is right! Daggers and Spears (etc) can't inflict damage on another weapon when parrying, but they do absorb it into their HP. Q3 - Can't find any reason why a Critical cancels an Impale anywhere yet in the text (still reading!)

Based on my reading: Q1 - This is my understanding, although they don't take damage on a critical. Shields also absorb damage, but they don't break - extra damage transfers to the defender. Q2 - I'm not sure that you can parry with a short stabbing or long-hafted weapon. Q3 - Not every weapon can impale, but otherwise yes. You do extra damage and ignore armour. Ouch!

There are a few fractions here and there - but I can see why Greg Stafford eventually shifted the mechanics from d100 to d20 in the way he did with Pendragon, or Moon Design (loosely) to HeroQuest. I'm actually interested in seeing how much of this original game continues through to Chaosium's next edition of RuneQuest - and how much comes from other sources like RQ6 or indeed, Pendragon and HeroQuest.

Another thing which may or my not be a controversial point, but for the most part every skill goes up in intervals of 5%......so why didn't they just go with a d20 die mechanic instead of percentiles?

I have noted that there in an appendix for gaining prior experience, although I'm still going through it.

Oh - I've only ever seen the character sheet to be sure! Are HP stratified into wound levels, as this is how it looks on the sheet?

On the basis of looking at the character sheet, the Spanish Medieval RPG, Aquelarre looks like it's replaced HP with Health levels.

I have one Hardcover copy, in good condition (practically as new), which I don't really use much to be honest (I basically switched to RQ6 when it came out). Make me an offer on PM or whatever and we can take it from there. No pressure, incidentally.

So, as a Teacher on holiday, I've had most of the day to peruse through the PDF I received earlier this afternoon. It's quite exciting for me, as my own experience in gaming started more in the late 80s sometime after RQ2's heyday. As such, it's the first time I've ever read a copy of it, and while you can see the roots of what followed in there (RQ3 et al) it actually has some very distinct differences. The most striking one for me is character generation and starting skills. Firstly, all base scores are much lower than modern gamers may be used to and there are no background or cultural packages that extend skill scores beyond these bases. Characteristics are all rolled on 3d6 with high or low scores influencing the skill bases by the odd 5% here or there usually, but when the variance amounts to a starting score of 10-20% it's still pretty low. Secondly, while you can make experience rolls against skills used to make small 5% incremental improvements, the real development is through downtime Training which is paid for in hard cash - not too dissimilar to Classic Traveller. Another similarity is the point that to get early training a character has to take out loans from various Guilds, Brotherhoods and possibly Cults in order to buy skill advancements (which actually looks quite similar to the way Warhammer games pay for advances with XP - except it's in Lunars instead). As such, the motivation to adventure is often initially driven to pay off debts, before trying to push for more powerful developments via cults and wotnot. The magic is nominally divided into Basic magic, which is ubiquitous and can also be bought on a spell-for-cash basis (and in effect these actually operate a bit like talents or feats from other games) and Rune Magic which is associated with different Cults and a degree of secrecy and mastery. Within Basic Magic, Sprit Magic as practiced by Shaman is also detailed (and involves spirit combat and the like as we see in RQ6) while there is also the practices of Alchemists and Sages to teach more practical skills in creating potions and poisons, or speaking languages respectively. There are lots of other little differences and stipulations that remind that this game is not the same as the Basic Roleplaying rules we may have been accustomed to via RQ3-6, Stormbringer and Call of Cthulhu. It's certainly different, and an interesting read because of it. I haven't noticed too many typos as of yet, although seeing Ducks with an Average Size of 54 was amusing....:) Still reading on.......what are YOUR thoughts?