Jump to content

Vile Traveller

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Vile Traveller last won the day on November 10 2016

Vile Traveller had the most liked content!

1 Follower

About Vile Traveller

  • Birthday 04/24/1967


  • Dreamscape Designer


  • RPG Biography
    Rolling percentages since 1983!
  • Current games
  • Blurb
    Crafting the finest table top role-playing games for your diversion.

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Recent Profile Visitors

5,132 profile views

Vile Traveller's Achievements

Senior Member

Senior Member (4/4)



  1. Because centaurs and minotaurs fit right into a bronze-age setting - Howard the Duck, not so much.
  2. It's all because of these minis: https://zenopusarchives.blogspot.com/2013/05/holmes-little-metal-people-take-ii.html
  3. After all these years this is also my first time hearing about Greg Stafford, and not the fall-out from the author's problems, being the cause for abandoning the game. Everyone I know heard about the issue at the time, and discussed it at length in person and online. I don't know why it would suddenly be a problem to bring it up as an aside on a gaming forum, other than the fact that it's off-topic (but when has that ever stopped anyone!). Self-censorship is a slippery slope. Now, then, back OT ... I see most of the proposals in RQ4 to be incremental improvements on RQ3, though in many cases not what I'd consider worth a new edition - but then, most of us grognards didn't think that new-fangled RQ3 was needed, either, and it did all right in the end. I certainly wouldn't call it more complex than RQ3, in fact as Barak Shathur mentions it seems to be a simplification and streamlining in a lot of details. Obviously it isn't terribly polished - I believe it was an early draft (correct me if I'm wrong), and the purpose of playtesting is to iron out those issues and improve upon them iteratively. Things I liked were the incremental damage bonus vs. the D6 steps of yore (people keep saying players like to roll more dice, but I have yet to meet those players), and some of the ideas in the previous experience which made it less hassle than RQ3 with its percentiles-per-year granularity. The fatigue rules were an improvement, but still not so much that I would want to use them. The skill list seems bloated (as did RQ3, and, to some extent, RQ2). Overall there were no ideas in RQ4 we adopted wholesale, but there were a lot which made us think (and house-rule). A lot of the changes seemed to be attempting to formalise or regularise procedures (e.g. a separate manoeuvre and spirit combat skill), but I'm not sure they succeeded, at least in this draft. The easy/medium/hard skills hearkened to GURPS but even there they were more trouble than they were worth IMO. I think the main issue with RQ4 was simply that it was trying to "advance" all the individual bits of RQ3 without taking a step back and looking at what could be streamlined or dropped altogether. A bit like what was said in the RQ/Mythras thread, where someone mentioned that RQ grew step-by-step between editions, rather than ever questioning its base assumptions. Still, it would be interesting to actually try to run this RAW, the only real way to see what works and what doesn't. That's something D&D 5E taught me, where reams of comments raged against design decisions which in practice turned out to make perfect sense. Since then I don't like to over-analyse written rules without trying them out first, hence my interest in following this topic.
  4. RQ3 started without Glorantha, and RQ2 really only had it bolted on. Mythras has an ever-expanding catalogue of settings. Badder, I presume you are asking about the rules, not the setting? Loz is probably the one to answer this best, but to my mind the most important difference is in the combat rules - Mythras goes for a more dynamic experience there, with more player options (and probably more complexity). There are lots of other small differences like characteristic bonuses, experience, etc. Mythras has a lot of magic systems, some similar to RQ and some completely different.
  5. Any thoughts on incorporating or adapting the RQ4 previous experience rules?
  6. No-one has been a bigger influence on my gaming, and gaming has been a big part of my life since my teens. I know he has been ill for some time (as Luise still is), but I shall miss his presence terribly.
  7. There's no conflict given the huge number of Cthulhu Mythos games out there beyond CoC. However, given that John's River of Heaven is already in the OpenQuest stable, it might be more likely for Cthulhu Rising to go the same way if it were he to revive it. I'd love to see either, but it doesn't seem likely.
  8. Not sure if these were what Lloyd was thinking of, but I developed penetration rules for advanced weaponry in my conversion of Striker! weapons for BRP. Soltakss included them in his Sci-fi SRD. I don't think there have ever been any Chaosium products with those rules.
  9. This is very nice ... I would have hopped on board, except I already have all of them. 😜
  10. I think Kersmai is referring to the old Worlds of Wonder incarnation of Magic World.
  11. Can't wait. I mean, I'll wait, of course - I just ... can't. πŸ€ͺ
  12. Make that 3 people who like the title. 😎 I have to agree with Jakob that one of the strengths of BRP is that it is trivially easy to adapt to any genre. I know, because over the years I have used/played it in settings including (but far from limited to) Greyhawk, Mystara, Dark Sun, Tekumel, Blade Runner, Aliens, Time Tunnel (an entire multiverse in itself), Spaghetti Wild West, Karl May Wild West, Mechwarrior, Traveller, Traveller 2300, Star Wars, A Plague of Demons (Keith Laumer), Mythago Wood leading to 4th Age Middle Earth, Biggles, Conan, Lankhmar, Outworld, various near-future STL SF campaigns, fantasy Rome in the Domitian era, WWII special agents, Macross, post-atomic, post-War of the Worlds, post-Gauda Prime (points for knowing this one!), Belgariad, and others I can't recall off the top of my head. I even remember playing in Glorantha back in the days when everyone was saying how unsuitable the BRP system had been and it was a good thing the setting was finally freed from its RQ shackles and translated into the freeform system it always should have been. πŸ˜‰ It is actually very difficult to take settings far from the core system of D&D without some re-writing of those core systems. The d20 flood demonstrated that quite clearly, with dozens of poorly-adapted settings for every game that successfully married the d20 system to a new setting. BRP, on the other hand, is a piece of cake to bolt stuff onto, even more so than GURPS. And yes, I'm one of those people hoping for bigger & better things for OQ3.
  • Create New...