Mugen

IIRC, first editions of StormBringer gave an weapon skill to artesans whose tool could be used in combat, It was random, and could be higher than a warrior's best weapon skill. There was no connection between both scores, though...

That's a first step, but it won't help a sword expert to use his overall combat experience with an axe, as suggested in the post I was anwering to.

Or just have broad base skills with specialties, like in Trudwang (but with just one specialization level, not two), or Revolution D100. Skill Transfer has the problem to make learning multiple skills useless, which is IMHO not wanted.

That sounds like Magic World sorcery to me. Elric! and Stormbringer 5th edition used the same system, but had more options for demons. Elric of Melniboné 2nd edition from Mongoose is another option. It's for Legend and can easily be used with Mythras.

What does "Sorcery" mean for you ? For instance, the magic systems that Mythras and OpenQuest name "Sorcery", is neither inherently "evil" nor "corrupt" and is in fact just impersonal form of magic. The BGB also have a system named "Sorcery", which is Elric!'s and Magic World's Magic system. It has spells for summoning demons, but is otherwise just a simple magic system with small spells. If you want a magic system which primarily deals with demon summoning, you could check StormBringer's first editions, or Mongoose's Elric of Malniboné.

Broadswords in RQ3 only had 10 AP. When your standard 1 handed weapon deals 1d8+1+1d4 damage, that 2 points difference is huge.

I actually think RQG rules would make perfect sense in a samurai game, where characters would be encouraged to use the same weapon for attack and parry (except for rather rare Ni-tô kenjutsu users), and the closest equivalent to a shield are the "sode" upper arm armor piece, which are basically static defenses against missiles.

I understood you perfectly. The problem I have is that, in my humble opinion, in an opposition between two characters with similar skills, the chance of success should be around 50% for each protagonist (*). Again, I've not done the math, but I think your proposal more likely gives ~60% chance to a 99% skill when opposed to a 98% skill, for instance. As a matter of fact, "lowest roll wins" already gives better odds of success to the highest skill, and you don't really need to add anything to this rule. (*) it's the reason why I don't count situations where both rolls fail as a "draw" and give victory to the highest roll.

I haven't done the maths (it's quite tedious...), but I think the advantage your method gives is just too big when opposed skills are close. And it gets bigger as chances of success near 100, as the most likely result becomes a double success.

I wonder if the Monty Pythons are also the brains behind the 2029 Asian Winter Games...

As I don't own that book, I may be out of context, but, to me, the answer (obviously) depends on whether the bayonet is held on hand or mounted at the point of your riffle.

Note that this post was part of a discussion about RuneQuest 3, which has very different rules for skill gains during character creation and training/study.

I would not recommend any old school product to anyone, especially if that person has dyslexia. Those games tend to have very different systems for every situation. I'm not a fan of 5e, which in my opinion should have been closer to 4e, but at least you have a basic system which you can rely on : roll a d20 and add a bonus, trying to roll higher than a difficulty threshold. Magic and character abilities are what makes 5e more complicated than TSR editions. Even if it was one of their stated goals, even a Fighter is more complex to play than in 1e. And they made "vancian" magic even more complex than before, as there's now a difference between the number of spells you prepare and the number you can cast per day. RQ Battle/Spirit Magic is considerably simpler. But its combat system is quite complex, with Strike Ranks, Hit Locations and so on. I think OpenQuest, Magic World or Dragonbane (when available...) are better options for complete beginners, or people that like simpler systems.

My proposal was to chose location instead of the weapon's special effect. No impale for piercing weapons, for instance, except on criticals. In my idea, that was a penalty in itself. To be honest, I thought the idea behind the expression "Called Shot" was that you had to declare a target before the attack. Am I wrong ?

I had never read the RQ2 rule prior to this thread, but I must say that I prefer it over RQ3. I don't really like the idea that a called shot will either hit the targeted location or miss. It seems to me that there should be a chance that you can hit another part of the body. However, I think I'd rather put a negative modifier to the attack skill rather than one on the Strike Rank. In Mythras, the equivalent of a called shot would be to chose a Special Effect to target a specific location. It means you'd have to get a better success level than your opponent : critical versus success, success versus failure, and so on. Back-porting this idea to RQG could be done by allowing one to chose the location on a Special Success instead of the standard weapon Special Success effect. Contrarily to Mythras, declaring the Called Shot could be done prior to the attack. In clear : if you want to do a Called Shot, you declare it when you do the attack. If you succeed with a Special (or crit) you hit the expected location. Otherwise, it's just a standard attack.

Of course, I never thought it was something unique to RQG.

Plus, a family Timeline for a Noldor would be extremely different from a Dunlending's. Elf : -You don't have a grand father. -Your father fought against morgoth 6000 years ago Human : -Your grand father was a farmer 40 years ago. -Your father was a farmer 20 years ago. Which inevitably raises the question of Elf PCs...

Plus, the first years in a job are often the time when you learn the most (even though it's also often an excuse for your boss to not give you a raise).

That's exactly why I created my own homebrew world in the 90s. I loved the system, but never managed to do grasp Glorantha as a RPG setting.

Question is : why chose RuneQuest rather than any other BRP-based game out there ? IMHO, the potential selling points of RQ as a system are : -it's combat system. Do you want hit locations and localized Hit Points ? Do you want an initiative system that is more complex than just reverse DEX order ? -its magic system(s). I'm not sure if it would suit Middle Earth very well. Spirit Magic as a basis for some character's semi-magical abilities might work, but IMHO it should not be as freely available as in Glorantha. I don't think devotion to the Valar should grant you spells as Runic Magic do. Sorcery might work, but I think latest version is too closely related to Glorantha.

I'm not sure what you mean here. You rolled your parents occupation, but you were free to chose your occupation freely, and even change it. Some occupations (Noble, Sorcerer, Chaman) had some tough pre-requisites, though. There was also an optional quick previous occupation rule which let you freely allot 30% per year, with a maximum of 75%+bonus, or 100% for knowledge skills.

I'm not sure it's suited for ElfQuest at all, but I tend to use the following types myself : -Biokinesis (control living material, plants and animals alike), -Metamagic (control others' spells), -Psychokinesis (apply physical forces to an object or being), -Telepathy (mind reading). I tend to associate ESP powers to the categories above. Life sense would be Biokinesis, Mind detection would be Psychokinesis, and anything relating to space or matter would be Psychokinesis. Magic sense would be Metamagic.

But it's exactly the same. The only question is how many points are chosen by the GM and the player.

Sometimes you learn something you did not expect to learn. I've always thought that the two ways that exist in RQ3 to earn points in skills (experience and training/study) were mandatory in all BRP games. Nowadays, I prefer to give ticks rather than use traditional rules.

I understand why people don't like the complexity of Mythras. I, for instance, don't want Localized Hit Points. But Combat Maneuvers are just a way to have customized critical successes. Instead of having a list of effects that happens when you roll a Special or a Critical, you chose which ones apply, depending on the difference between success levels. I prefer to give a number of checks, but assign half of those according to the events that took place during the session.