Mugen

Sounds like a simple and effective rule. I like it. As far as I remember, StormBringer 1 does double damage, whatever weapon you use. You're right. Impaling weapons do double damage, but special results have no impact on non-impaling weapons.

I would definitely add OpenQuest to the list of RuneQuest editions, as it is a game that was specifically created to reproduce its creator's experiences with RuneQuest 3, with a simpler ruleset. Its combat system is slightly more complex than Call of Cthulhu (which is not true of any edition of RuneQuest), and it has very simple versions of Battle/Spirit magic, Divine magic and Sorcery. Anyway, if someone specifically wants to play a game in Glorantha, RuneQuest 2 and the next RuneQuest are the best options...

Fact is there are mote than 2 versions of RuneQuest available and to chose from, not counting OpenQuest, which is a simplified RuneQuest 3. My own version would be a patchwork of 3rd and Mythras, with bits from Legend, personally.

There are a lot of differences between both games. In fact, it's easier to make a list of what make them similar... Both are skill-based games that use d100 rolls under a skill value as their base system. Both use the same array of 7 characteristics as the basis of character definition. Both use localized hit points : each humanoid body is split in 7 parts, and each part has a hit points number. RQ Classic also has a generic hit points score, which reflects one's whole body condition. Neither use the concepts of classes and levels. RQ Classic is more simple, I think, but suffers from poor organization of the book, and bad explanations. Mythras is richer, but is more difficult to master. I suggest buying and reading Mongoose's Legend first, which is the first edition -or beta version- of Mythras. Also, Mythras has Sorcery, which allows to play traditional D&D magic-users, and Mysticism, which allows to play shaolin monks and jedi-type characters. Both have systems for "common magic", available to anyone, divine magic, available by worshiping a god, and animism, which consists in summoning and binding non-corporeal "magical" beings.

You could do that, but you'll end up with the same chances of success than if you just compared the d100 rolls and told the highest roll wins. So, why add a substraction to the system when you can do a simple comparison?

Well, my plan is to have broad skills that can grow with experience, and characteristics grow way too slowly for what I want. In my idea, a master swordsman should have Melee around 75, and Sword around 35, for a total of 110%. In order to reach 75% by increasing STR, DEX and INT, I would need an average value of 30 in all 3 Anyway, the base value for each aptitude is equal to the'sum of 2 characteristics (STR+DEX for Melee, CHA x2 for communication, INT x2 for knowledge, and so on...) There's also 2 categories of "specialties" : most are just a bonus to an aptitude, but others ("skills") cannot be used before someone taught you how to use those. Magic, crafts and specific knowledge are examples of skills.

Select the [+] box above the quote box, then press "delete".

Ok ! Your question makes more sense now I think the following might work: -Experience checks are given to specialties. -Aptitudes get experience checks only if an experience check for a specialty was succesfull, but can't get more than one per session. As for the exact chances to improve aptitude and specialties, I think something along those lines would work: -For specialities, a d100 roll > (current value x3) or 95 -For aptitudes, a d100 roll > (current value+25) or 95 Yes, a 1-level root/branch system. And one which starts at a rather broad definition level, and allows for some combination with other branches.

I may not be very clear in my explanations, but there's no contradiction in my head Melee is the base aptitude for using any hand-to-hand weapons (*). That's what you use when you have a weapon in hand with which you have no applicable specialty. In the example above, the character has no Axe specialty. So, he'll have an effective chance of success of 45% with any action (or reaction) using an axe. (*) Unarmed combat and Dodge are also covered by Melee, but only for characters whose Melee aptitude is superior to Athletics.

No, I didn't have time to test it. I don't play a lot these days, and all my plans to organize rpg sessions fail miserably... My intent was to avoid the case where a swordfighter stops being able to fight if he uses an axe instead. And 45% is certainly not the right aptitude value for a good fighter. As a matter of fact, I certainly won't use it with a d100 at all, and will rather use a d20 or a d10 if I do. It's quite simple : the character above would work as if he had a 80% skill if he's holding a weapon identified as a "Sword", and 70% if he uses a "Dagger". If he holds an "Axe", he's down to 45%. If he Dodges, he'll have an effective skill of 65%.

The way I see it, Kenjutsu and Ni-tô-kenjutsu only reduce drastically the number of skills needed. In RQ3, where attack and parry are different skills and you need to develop different skills for your right hand and left hand, kenjutsu is a substitute for Attack (1H Sword, right hand), Parry (1H Sword, right hand), Attack (2H Sword) and Parry (2H Sword) - and perhaps attack and parry for daggers... And ni-tô kenjutsu is also a substitute for 4 or more skills. Ok. Given the theme of the thread, I was focusing on the combat rules of the games. I won't comment on magic, as I'm torn between the 2 rulesets, which I appreciate for different reasons. I agree on Combat Actions, though.

Except, in my mind, specialties have a value. For instance: Melee 45% -Sword +35% (total 80%) -Dagger +25% (total 70%) -Dodge +20% (total 65%) So, this is both a 1-level skill tree and Traits with a number, and the reason I call it a compromise. I understand that attacking with a short sword is different from attacking with a long sword, but I don't think it is worth more than a 10% difference. I could call my specialities "skills" and add "specialities" worth +10%...

Really ? I view RQ6 as simpler than RQ3 on many levels. For instance, combat special effects are a good way to handle with one rule situations that all need a special rule in RQ3.

It seems I've always misunderstood this skill. I always thought it was a skill for attacking and parrying with an off-hand wakizashi, and that your main hand was still using the kenjutsu skill. But after re-reading the skill, I think you're right.

As for myself, I'm perfectly fine with having a few (maximum 10) generic and broad aptitudes, and an undefined number of "specialties" for each aptitude. That is, I'll only have 1 Melee and 1Marksmanship aptitudes, and specialties like swords, axes, daggers, bows, riffles, and so on. When in a situation where a specialty applies, its value is added to the base aptitude. That's IMHO a good compromise between D100 Revolution Traits and complex skill trees.

Usually, the answer to this question is "I prefer the rule in the RQ edition which I learned first". So... I prefer the RQ3 version. Basically, having 2 weapons mean more versatility, as you can parry or attack once with each weapon.

Rules for such cristals already exist for Chaosium's RuneQuest 1, 2 and 3 (which all precede Mongoose's RuneQuest 1) without the need to tinker with MRQ1 rules. RQ1 and 2 can be found on drivethrurpg. RQ3 rules for crystals only exist in the "Elder Secrets" supplement. From my memory, crystals has a POW value, and can be of one of 3 types: -Storage crystals hold extra magic points. -Spell crystals grant their users use of spells. -Enhancement crystals double the effect of the MP spent to cast a spell, up to their POW. So, if a caster casts a Sharpblade 2 spell and has a Sharpblade 3 enhancement crystal, his spell will be treated as a Sharpblade 4 spell (2, doubled by the crystal). If he now casts a Sharpblade 5 spell, the crystal will only add 3 (its POW) to the spell's. Good POW values are between 4 and 8 for storage crystals, and 1 to 6 for the others. I'd also use OpenQuest 2 SRD rather than MRQ1, and use Battle Magic as a base. MRQ1 uses 1 skill for each rune, which is rather cumbersome. http://openquest.d101games.com/openquest-srd/

It's quite simple, actually : make your character a Mystic or a Sorcerer, and pick the right spells. Sorcery spells such as Damage Enhancement and Damage Resistance are obvious. Wrack is also a good candidate, as is Enchant(sword). Edit: Cults make an excellent equivalent to Prestige Classes. Edit 2: and Attract (threat) makes a good "curse" spell

I'd rather let the one with the highest roll win, like it is the case when both succeeds. I don't like the fact that, in the specific context where both fail, the lowest skill has more chance of success than the highest one.

The answer has already been given in a previous thread here : skill bonuses will be multiples of 5%, like in RQ2. This decision was taken to avoid too many skill modifications when POW increases or decreases. As for myself, I'd rather have skill base values as the sum of 2 characteristics (one different base per category) and remove POW from those...

I do the same, but I impose half the IP I award. Those I give are experience, whereas those players assign are training, or self-focus.

It's possible to mix both approaches if you state that players have to put some of their experience points into skills they used in play. It's also possible to let the GM chose which skills will get those session-related xp.

That's also my understanding. Yes, and "Âme" ("soul") seems like another name for "SANity". I like their skill list, but I don't get what is the difference between "coercition" ("coercion") and "persuasion".

Mournblade, the latest official game set in the Young Kingdoms, was published by a french company in 2015. It is based on a d10+attribute+skill system, with a twist : one can roll a d20 if he wants, but any odd result will be treated as a 0. I've not read it, but according to the game's description, PCs in this game are meant to be agents of one of the chaos or law divinities.

Ok