DreadDomain

Correct. These editions were legit. RuneQuest 6, now Mythras, is a beautiful game and the company, the Design Mechanism (not Mongoose Design), is under the helm of stellar game designers Lawrence "Loz" Whittaker and Pete Nash. These guys are professionals and no piracy was involved.

Not ridiculous at all mate... I want a copy!

I generally does not need a combat system that tries to replicate reality but I like combat that: 1) involve tactics and decision making to a degree. I don't necessarily dislike repetitive turns, I attack, I parry, I attack, I parry but I dislike it when it is the only option. 2) have consequence and where the tactics/approach you choose (number 1 above) have an impact on the consequences 3) Give a sense they are real, believable. I like watching a movie and be able to visualise it in a combat system. Regarding 1, I believe RQG provides it but is only missing a "closing maneuver" to make the reach of a weapon something you can use to your advantage, may it be long of short. Regarding 2, RQG definitely delivers. Criticals and specials that vary depending on weapon type, damage that have various consequences based on hit location, parries that are not binary (I parry or I don't), the real possibility that you might die or be seriously injured in any fight and the in game expectation, that you will try to avoid it or at the very least try to avoid bringing it to a lethal conclusion by surrendering and offering ransom or by capturing an enemy and collecting ransom. Regarding 3, I only need to forget about the duration of a MR (12 seconds) and replace it in my head by "an elastic amount of time lasting from a few seconds to 12 seconds" and I am happy. With all 3 conditions filled, storytelling then becomes easy and very satisfying.

I would also add that my most successful GMing was when I also enjoyed the characters themselves. Too often I have allowed characters that I was not too enthused about and it always ended being a chores...

That's great Phil, looks good. I really enjoy the various options you provide between. Regarding the Occupational skills of the French edition, I have no clue how it came to be but going through it it seems to make a lot of sense. I am sure this change was not made without Chaosium's approval and I suspect that if they agreed to it, they may implement it themselves in a future printing of the rules.

Sure, why not? Players will engage differently with rules. Some players will want to describe a concept how let the gm create the mechanics behind it (so they probably won't bother) but some players want to delve in to the behind the scene cog in the machine (irrespective if they are power gamers or not) I dont disagree with your elevator pitch but you focus on how the cults fit in society which in my opinion, doesn't really "talk" to many players. My elevator pitch was focused on the type of characters worshipping those gods to help a player choose a deity that fits their vision of their characters. RQG offers another tool to help newcomers, the descriptions of the runes. By knowing which runes you will want your character to be strong in to emulate your god, it gives a pretty good view on which personality type you might end up with. It ends up being almost a four-pronged approach when it comes to choosing the god of your character: 1 - Which types of characters worship a god (my pitch) 2 - How the cult fits in society (your pitch) 3 - What personality type a god will influence on a character (the runes) 4 - What skills and magic will a character have access to (the rules) For some, I suspect, number 4 might come first when it comes to choosing.

I think you hit the nail on the head ". How they are presented is important. "Humakt is the Sword God, Wielder of Death, whose worshippers are stern and fearsome fighters who live by a rigid code of honor and have for sole purpose to deliver Death to their enemies" might give better context of Humakt place in society. "Orlanth is the Storm God, King of the Gods, worshipped by bold adventurers, warrior poets, freedom fighters and barbarian kings" sounds a bit more exciting... :)..

I am surprised and intrigued that the French edition will have tweaks. I wonder what else will differ...

Really? Did I miss an announcement? That being said, good work Phil, well done on the sheet. Quick question, the Alternative Rules snapshot found here https://runequest-glorantha.fandom.com/wiki/Google_Sheets_Character_Creation_Workbook_by_Phil_Hibbs shows an alternate rule with "Use profession skill bonus values from the French edition" What is different in the French edition?

Good point, I should probably have another look at him (I was never much of a Yelm guy). I'll wait for the Gods book for the Red Goddess. You mention greater gods, wouldn't Kyger Litor also be one of them? Again, need to have a second look at her. I don't recall her being so terrifying.

Yeah, well, both Orlanth and Ernalda are packed with magic and then access more magic from associated cults. There is not much doubt in my mind that they are the most powerful cults in RQG. Maybe GoG will offer a different balance but so far, it's a no contest. And yes Shield of Arran is pretty fabulous.

Interesting, are these the flavourful versions of Shield and Dark Walk? Are we going to see different names for classic spells in the Gods book?

If you read the Design Notes put together by Jeff while they were designing RQG, I believe this is the route they were going. Not sure why they changed their minds.

No, it is an addition to your Shield skill when you parry. A character with Medium Shield 67%, would attack at 67% but would parry with their shield at 97%. It's a pretty big advantage.

Crossposted!!

That is not a bad solution at all but it does heavily penalize fighters fighting with 2-handed weapons, or only one 1-handed weapon, compared to weapon-and-shield or two-weapons fighting. My own house rule went to other way. Instead of penalizing non-shield user, I decided to reward them. First, all shields have a defensive bonus based on size of shield. The DB is applied when shield blocking but not when attacking. Small shields have +20% Defensive Bonus, medium shields +30% and large shield +40%. Second, I consider the shield statistics on p.217 are for hide shields. Wicker shields have an extra +1 HP and wood shields have an extra +2 HP. I feel, that combined with the benefit they give against range attacks that these two additions make the shields worth their while.

It's totally fair game 😉

Which is a shame because there are so many thing in RQG that are done brilliantly but it is often over shadowed by the poor rules editing. But look, the book has been out for two years and I don't believe that anyone at Chaosium ever recognized there was an issue and that they would fix it (with a revised corebook or otherwise). Instead, we got told in Rune Fixes 2 on March 20 that ... "Two-weapon fighting (dual wielding) is another of those issues that seems clear enough on paper to the designers and yet confounds many players and gamemasters are the rules for two-weapon fighting" To top it all, reread that sentence (specifically how it starts and how it ends). It is a fine example of the quality of editing in RQG. Oh the irony... they tell us how dumb we are not to understand their brilliant writing... with a badly written sentence.

I think the rules as intended work but they would need to be revised/rewritten by someome with good technical writing skills. I don't expect that to happen anytime soon (or ever). Some mistakes are in formatting. They are really obvious and easy to fix which makes it even more surprising that they went through the net. Three examples: 1) The Attack and Parry Results table has the attack component on the side and the defend component (parry) at the top. The Dodge Results table has the defend (dodge) component on the side and the attack component at the top. It's a minor thing but going from one table to the other is confusing especially on the gm screen where you seen both of them. Flip the Dodge table and you fix this. 2) On page 201, we find the Dodge section. Under that section you have; Use of Dodge And Parry Against Missile Weapons, Combat With Skills Above 100%, and, Using Passions And Runes In Combat. It's only a small issue but clearly the last two should not be sub-sections of Dodge but be in the Other Combat Rules section. 3) Except for the possibility of getting stuck, special damage for impaling and slashing weapons work exactly the same but both sections are written differently. They are both perfectly understandable but it leads the reader to believe something must be different. But bearing that, adding options and alternatives in future rules supplement would be a good option.

The ability to cast multiple spells in melee still throw me off. Multiple Activities During Melee is not super helpful but it seems to indicate the once engaged you cannot cast bladesharp on your weapon and then attack in the same round but you can defend and cast spells (note the plural). As impressive as the game is, RQG suffers from a combination of: 1) being very loosely written (which also leads to areas that are seemingly contradictory) 2) addition of rules that bring complexity for no real benefit. The fact that SR are working differently in or out of melee is confusing for many. 3) official answers that sometimes contradict one another or are not well thought out and make people go "whu?"

And I'm surprised people are surprised 😃 It's was the rule says and I did not realised there was any ambiguity. Then again, I have not seen any conversations on this on FB (how many social media does one need to follow to understand the rules?) Uhh what? Just so I am clear, what is the final answer? Does it depend if you are engaged in melee or not?

It wasn't really a stand out for me either but I really liked that each Runes had a specific personality trait attached to it. It really gives texture to the characters.

I have yet to deep dive into it but I have the exact same impressions. Man it looks good! As a side note, I am really impressed by what is published under the Jonstown Compendium banner from a quantity and quality standpoint. But SSoS may have set the bar.

Yes, I believe the clarification was specifically for the Tuskers and the Bloody Tusk. The other mention was that the core book was written with human characters in mind (which is not the same as saying that non-human characters do not have to comply).

My first character in RQ3, which ended up being my most famous, was a warrior through and through and as I was discovering the Gods of Glorantha box set, Humakt was a very compelling choice. And how can someone resist the Lord Demon of the Legions of Death, who represents the mindless explosion of fear and frenzy against both law and chaos which finds its only justification and satisfaction in unlimited violence? ZZ for the win!