Jason Farrell

Granted that I don't know anything about that system but what you just wrote, I don't like that either because it too rigidly defines when you move and when you do other things.  It would seem to preclude there being a difference between running across a room and attacking versus attacking and then running out of a room.  Both should be possible, imo. 

I love the idea of what a character is actually doing mattering in the determination of how quickly they can do it.  I much prefer that in theory to the highly abstracted initiative roll in D&D/Pathfinder.  Unfortunately, there are some big flaws in the SR system and these conversations are common, for good reason.  I don't know that there's any way around adjudicating individual cases on the fly as a GM using the current system as written.

So continuing to think about this and talking out loud now, one scenario in which it makes sense to count movement in strike ranks would be the following:  X casts a rune spell at the beginning of their round and does nothing else.  Y casts a rune spell but only after running across the room.  Y would not cast their rune spell as soon as X would because they are, say, running 18 meters ( so they would cast it on SR 7)

There's some common sense at work there that is probably understandable to any player or GM.  But it still complicates thing from the standpoint of having a consistent initiative system.  I think part of the issue with the OP's example is that it's a melee.  It doesn't seem logical that Stevie would attack before Larry because Stevie is attacking Larry himself.  Larry having to run toward him would seem to be immaterial once they were actually engaged.  On the other hand, if Stevie was attacking Leroy a meter away from him in the opposite direction rather than Larry, it would make sense that Stevie's attack would happen before Larry could reach and attack Stevie.

I haven't thought through all the permutations yet, but it seems to me that removing movement from the SR calculation entirely might be the best thing.

I'm not sure what is gained by including it.  As David says here and I've heard many times, SR is used to determine who goes first.  Period.  So the rules don't want you to think in terms of where combatant X is at a given SR based on their movement.

I'm considering separating the two and using the MR only to determine where combatants can get to during their turn, not in what order they will act. 

Very, very unlikely.

Complaining and actually making a major change in behavior are two very different things.  In the world of comics, I've seen similar levels of outrage directed at Marvel and/or DC for everything from price increases to editorial direction, and very rarely do those fans ultimately stop reading the same books they've always read.  They don't stop reading Marvel/DC and start buying a bunch of Image or IDW books.

Most D&D players will remain D&D players.  There will be some who are angry enough to look elsewhere, but it will be a minority.  And many of those people will more likely gravitate to something different yet familar, like Pathfinder.

But will it result in some increased interest in Runequest and other role-playing systems?  Almost certainly!  And that's great.

15 minutes ago, Agentorange said:

Anyway enough with the cheese derailment of the thread, I'll let things return to their proper place.

If you read the book, you'll know it's not a derailment.  There have been wars!

1 hour ago, Agentorange said:

Are there any cheese related spells ?

Haha, if only!

10 hours ago, Nick Brooke said:

(Why don't any of the people who keep telling us they want more RQ settings outside of Dragon Pass and Prax ever discuss Paul's significant body of work? It baffles me)

Grammar and spelling issues aside (which are admittedly very distracting for me), Paul Baker's work is great.  Tons of interesting ideas, and he gets Glorantha, so those ideas have a high hit to miss ratio for me. 

Jamie Revell is another good source of material about places outside Dragon Pass and Prax.   And of course the recent Imther book by Harald Smith.  (I know you know this, Nick, but for others who might be interested)

I can help out in that regard, Ian.  I've done some editing here and there (mostly for friends) and reasonably earned my English degree.  I'm also very distracted by typos, so maybe it's time to take an opportunity to help reduce them instead of just internally complaining about them!  😉

We're grateful, Ian.  😉  Hopefully Pavis vol. 2 is coming along nicely.

I just bought and flipped through this and it looks like everything I could have hoped for.  This book is absolutely bursting with flavorful details.  I love books that blend mechanical additions (like the in-depth character backgrounds and new spells) with information about Glorantha, from the broadly historical to the fascinatingly specfic (there are a good 3 pages on cheeses!).   The visual presentation is very pleasing as well.   I would buy a virtually unlimited number of books of this kind of breadth, depth, quality and care.

Since a deadline is no longer a factor, maybe revisit your decision to split the release into two separate books.  I think it might sell better.  Otherwise, you may get people buying one or the other, but not both.  I don't know how fleshed out your Marshedge is, but if it's mostly described for the specific adventure you're writing, it may make more sense as one volume.  People aren't afraid of larger books... many of the best selling JC titles are 100+ pages, some of them well in excess of that.

Looking forward to it!

It looks very... actiony.

6 hours ago, Bill the barbarian said:

Just a quick question, have you tried  the free solo scenario "The Battle of Dangerford"? It seems to be impossible to find on the chaosium.com site...

For possible future reference, "Runequest RPG" on the top banner, then "playing Runequest" and it's the second main section, link included.

On 10/19/2022 at 7:29 PM, Ian A. Thomson said:

Should only be a few weeks before they are done. Wondering how regularly to release each following vol. Thinking every 3 or 4 months?

 

If they're finished, I'd rather see them much more often, personally.  Monthly, perhaps.  I understand not wanting to bombard people and perhaps infringe on sales, but I don't think $20 a month is too much for most anyone with a hobby like this.  If they all come out tomorrow, I'd buy them all.  But that's me. 😉

Logical and tactically interesting.  I think it's a good idea and I may adopt it.

5 hours ago, smiorgan said:

Griffin Mountain and Borderlands encounter tables were already like that to some extent.

100%.  I just looked at my copies to remind myself and you're right, they're exactly like that.

Be sure to share this on the Facebook page if you haven't already.  The Discord too.

Not to put words in your mouth, but encounter tables does not equal sandbox.  A sandbox simply means that the players have agency to go where they want and engage in the activities they want, rather than adhering to a linear narrative structure preordained by the GM.  That sandbox can be 100% made up of bespoke encounters, though that would admittedly be a lot of work.  The Pathfinder campaign I've been in for several years is a sandbox in which major storylines emerge, and as far as I know, my GM never rolls on encounter tables.  Based on what we're doing and where we're going and what we're interested in, he prepares content for it and improvises as needed.

To put it another way, if you're trying to equate a lack of desire to use encounter tables as a lack of interest in "...side jobs, patrons, and other free play elements that tie into  the main story in unexpected ways", the two are not in any way equivalent. 

At their most basic, encounter tables are literally just roll 46-65 and encounter 1d4+4 Broo, and the like.  That's nothing more than time filler.  Which can be fine, especially if the players are itching for a fight and haven't had one for a while.  Putting a little more personality and background into that encounter isn't super hard, and to me is much more rewarding than taking a random result.  In some of the HQ books in particular, the encounter tables were more like encounter guides; they went into some detail on how and why each group was encountered, and if there were sentient creatures, they provided a bit of motivation and backstory, maybe some infighting, things like that.  Much more useful, imo.

9 hours ago, Soccercalle said:

I am also not interested in Encounter Tables. They should definitely be in the regional supplements. It could have been good to have encounter tables for Colymar Land in the GM Screen Pack and for the Jonstown area in the Starter Set. But I rarely if ever use them. If I run a short scenario and wants to add an extra battle to fill a session I may add one or two encounters. But not because a table and a roll of the dice orders me to do it.

I agree with all of this.

3 hours ago, jajagappa said:

Of course they are out there.  And those of us who have been with RQ for a while know that and can provide direction to those that are particularly useful.  But,... come at it from the standpoint of a new GM who is trying to learn how to use RQG and how to build an adventure, perhaps from scratch or perhaps just for some sandbox play.  When I started I could easily go to Appendix J in RQ2 and see what type of terrain I was in, roll the dice, and identify an encounter.  It was all in that one book (even if some of it was fairly brief).  

That's what I did.  I named some places to find them.

Mostly though, I was expressing my own opinion that encounter tables aren't a very necessary thing at all.  Certainly not a roadblock to running the game.  I am a new GM, and I don't need and won't use encounter tables.

Encounter tables, imo, are about the least vital thing possible.  All you need is the bestiary and some common sense (don't attack adventurers with crocodiles on a mountain top, etc) and you're good.  You can even use this site to generate the stats if you're so inclined: https://basicroleplaying.net/rqg/adversaries/

If you gotta have them, they're out there.  Griffin Mountain, Pavis & Big Rubble, etc have encounter tables that can be tweaked and used.  If you can find them, Pavis: Gateway to Adventure and the Sartar Companion for HQ have extensive random encounter tables as well.

1 hour ago, Rodney Dangerduck said:

I would accept any order at all.

Jeff R. has said on a couple of occasions that the Cults book, with its size and art requirements and such, created a publishing bottleneck, and that after its release we should see several books in quick succession.  Perhaps in a couple of years we'll be celebrating how much stuff is out for Runequest.

Btw, I've read both Red Cow books, and there is copious guidance for a prospective GM, and it has the benefit of being information specific to that campaign, not general advice and info.

General information on gamemastering can be found in lots of places.  Advice and info on how to handle Glorantha specific stuff (clan and tribal organization, for example) is often found directly in books like the Red Cow books, and Andrew Logan Montgomery's books.

What I'm personally more interested in from the Gamemaster book are heroquesting rules (which can be cobbled together from elsewhere, if one is so inclined) and more stuff about magical treasures, something I think has been lacking so far.

Not that I don't agree with the OP that it's more than a little disappointing that a book expllcitly mentioned in the back of the rulebook still isn't out 4 years later.