DreadDomain

I personally like Fuzion but I agree as a system, it isn't a big draw. While there is a lot I like about A:AKW, I am particularly turned off by the number of characteristics (15).

What leaner systems do you prefer nowadays? Just curious what you are interested in and what you consider leaner. As an example, I do not consider QuestWorld to be particularly leaner but some might.

You have written a few versions of Merrie England and Robin Hood haven't you? What is the Stone Age one?

Good one. That would be a lot easier than doing Conan and would cover the same range I suppose.

Well, that went down like a lead balloon. More than 80 views and no one would like to see RQ used for anything else even if only as a dream project... sigh ...

Hopefully he has already done it! Isn't it a December digital release? You're such a tease...

I thought this supplement is pretty good. Please consider a full Artesia RQ game. Just sayin'. I think I read on Reddit that he was working on more Glorantha covers.

I do, I do. As I was writing this I was thinking "someone will come here and tell me Magic World has skill categories and cultures" I find skill categories and cultures slightly weak in MW when compared to how they are done in RQ. The Last Barrow portray only the Danian culture but they are done as per RQ. Any other setting you would like to see in RQ or any flavour of BRP?

On RPG.net, there is a thread about Artesia where it was announced a scenario from Mark Smylie's Artesia, The Last Barrow, was now available on Drivethru. What is of particular interest is that the third appendix includes rules for RuneQuest, as well as ideas on how and where to place the adventure's location in Glorantha. Before I read this, I was browsing A:AKW lately it struck me how RuneQuest would work like a glove for the Artesia RPG and how the Runes mechanism was perfectly adaptable to simulate the Arcana. This is exactly what this appendix of the Last Barrow is doing. I invite anyone who is interested in Artesia and RQ to give it a look. Just for a bit of fun, what game would you love to see published using RQ as a base and adapted as required? I'd go for: Sword and Barrows. The Artesia/Blackheart/Known World rpg where the Runes are replaced by the Arcana. Conan: Roleplaying in the Hyborian Age. I always felt RQ/Mythras would be perfect for it. Where the rules are replaced by Personality traits Stormbringer. Why RQ and not the already beloved Stormbringer/Elric!/Magic World? Because I prefer Skill Category modifiers and a strong emphasis on cultures and personalities. Would be happy to have combat influenced more by Stormbringer. Mythic Iceland. Well, that's a no brainer. A good nod to Harn except that I feel it is already very well serviced by Harnmaster. What else would you buy?

At some point (a month or so ago), a comment was made that the Red Book of Magic PDF and the Starter Set PDF could be made available before the end of the year. RBoM seems to be imminent so there might be hope for the Starter Set.

Perhaps but weren't you asking if there was any borderline case unresolved? So trying to inderstand the back and forth above: A spirit is engaged in a spirit combat with Bob when Boris shows up with his magical sword. 1) Can the spirit also engage Boris in spirit combat? No (unless it has a special power to do so) 2) Can Boris swing his sword at the spirit. Yes. If he does, he becomes engaged in spirit combat, it is resolve through the same spirit combat mechanics (quick contest) with the same consequences (refers "Resolving Spirit Combat" and "Spirit Combat Damage" p.368. Correct? Hopefully that's a "yes or no" answer.

Ok, I went back and read that section again. I always interpreted it as "Spirit Combat can only be initiated by a discorporate spirit" because it has to become visible and manifest itself but once it is initiated, others could jump in. Which seems supported by "Corporeal entities may attack a spirit that is engaged in spirit combat with enchanted weapons and spells" which doesn't say it has to be engaged with them. Now I see there is another potential interpretation.

I remember that one because I thought it was quite a departure that somewhat mirrored the decision to not split attack and parry.

I have not clicked on the link but going from memory, is it that they considered using a shield would not be a separate skill but would be part of the main weapon skill?

Darn, I need to re-read this!

I see, but that is not my reading of that section. The sentence you quote is actually not written like this but rather says: "Corporeal entities may attack a spirit that is engaged in spirit combat with enchanted weapons and spells." It doesn't say it has to be engaged with them.

I didn't come with an expression but white elephant and usine à gaz are clearly not conveying the same message I also like that it comes with a different mechanic (quick contest) if only for flavour. Ok, now I think we might be over thinking this So far so good Not sure what you mean by that. Using a weapon in spirit combat is still resolved by a quick contest so from a rule perspective, it is an exchange How many time you can use roll your weapon skill and when (SR) in a round is still subject to the normal rules but for spirit combat, I do not believe a -20% on parry would apply. Mechanically, it would not make any sense. Unless you physically attack the spirit in essence forcing a resolution of the struggle earlier in the round. Nah! I prefer that characters physically attack spirit manifestation by swinging their weapon. Is that the case? Someone else cannot attack a spirit? This is not how I read "Attacking with Weapons and Spells" p.366 (Corporeal entities can attack a spirit that is engaged in spirit combat...). It does not say "engaged with them in spirit combat. The spirit has materialised and is visible, by swinging your sword at him, you are effectively also entering spirit combat with it. The spirit with use its spirit combat normally in a quick contest with you, which does not penalise it for the other contest in play. Overthinking this my Lord . I am not sure what problem you are trying to solve. Why not just engage the spirit with a quick contest when you SR comes? Again not sure what problem we are trying to solve And that may be the root of my misunderstanding. Are the rules preventing people to attack spirits already engaged. That is not my ready. By the way, this is not a really ganging up since the spirit uses its full skill in multiple quick contests. It might actually give it more chance to possess someone depending on the strength of its opponents

I see, the file itself you mean. If you look at the bottom of the fourth page of the PDF you will find: Chaosium Publications 2020. ISBN blablabla Published in May 2008. Printed in the USA

That is certainly a good argument for it (feeling different).

That is how I prefer it. It's just simpler.

As someone who his favorite classic RQ is RQ3, I will echo this. . My perspective is totally different. I believe RQ3 was a vast improvement over RQ2 and I would have preferred RQG to be based off RQ3. But in the end, even if RQG does not make all the choices I would have made, in the aggregate, I believe RQG is better than RQ3. Actually, for all the expressed design intent, beyond what the stat block looks like, I do not find RQG that close to RQ2. And I am also glad the timeline was advanced. It is interesting that I probably am a grognard whose opinion Jeff thinks should be dismissed but I am generally very positive about RQG (even if I still want to see a revised and corrected edition) Agreed! Seconded! All that to say that irrespective of our perspectives of what is best (RQ1, RQ2, RQ3, RQ6, RQG), a lot of us are united by our love of Glorantha and RuneQuest.

In RQG it's almost like: 1. Statement of Intent 2. Movement of unengaged characters... well unless you choose to do 3.1 or 3.2 or 3.3 first 3.1 Rune Magic on SR 1... plus MP-1 3.2 Missile attacks on Dex SR and you can potentially cast another one 5 SR later... or move... or if unengaged, do something else 3.3 Spirit Magic or Sorcery Spells on Dex SR... plus MP-1 and you can potentially cast another one 5 SR later.. or if unengaged, move... or do something else 3.4 Melee attacks on DEX+SIZ+Weapon SR... plus maybe a second attack.. and maybe a third. 3.5 Spirit Combat on SR 12... unless it already happened during the Melee stage. 4. Bookkeeping Edit: Just to be clear, I like the SR system. Always have. I feel it has often been explained in convoluted ways and some "simplifications", like breaking movement off the flow or making a distinction between engaged and unengaged, in fact lead to more confusion. But that is a different topic. I find this thread very useful so far.

I would be tempted to rule that the Trance spells allow all sorts of "in combat" activities but that the spell drops at the end of the combat.

Since it is a quick contest, there is no such thing as attack versus defend isn't it? If you use you sword to try to overcome a spirit, you use your sword skill vs its spirit combat which represents the whole engagement. There is no strict attack versus parry/dodge unlike in physical combat.

As soltakss say. It's fairly easy to do. The question is how are character created? Are you creating characters on a point budget? If so buying Alternate Form is probably the way to go. However, BRP is not strickly a point buy system and usually people will pick a race/culture/profession and get whatever comes with it. You when a werewolf? Pick the werewolf template, roll your characteristics (or assign them on a budget) take the traits that come with it (positive and negative) and skills and so on. Something in the template doesn't fit your vision? A gm/player discussion resolves it. Immortality/slow aging is a good example of this. You can assign a mechanic to it, as per the examples quoted, or you can had the trait "immortal" or "slow aging" on the sheet. Should it cost something? Maybe, probably not. If everyone is immortal in the group, it becomes a campaign dial more than anything else. Of the 2012 edition? Even my fresh PDF from 2020 tells me the BGB was published in May 2008. Was there another edition that I missed?