DreadDomain

Yes. I really like the picture where the sits on the rubie throne with Strombringer in front of him. It as the same synergistic vibe that Loz was describing earlier. It would make a great cover for the Elric/Stormbringer rpg powered by RQ6 . I myself picture Elric with a tall, broad shouldered bit otherwise slim athlectic build (not skinny). He is sickly but throught drugs and herbs, he did train to because a swordmaster. I am sure he has put some fine muscles on his slim frame.

Quite right. In my opinion, if you want a fantasy focused product with quite a bit of crunch and options (5 magical traditions, lots of spells, many tactical options in combat, guidelines to build guild/brotherhoods/cults, a complete bestiary) in a single book, the best choice is RuneQuest 6. Classic Fantasy, Magic World and Legend are all good but they do not tick all the boxes like RQ does. If cash is really tight, Legend (which is basically RQ5) at only 1$ is a good choice even if it is not as polished as RQ and doesn't contain nearly as much meat. If you add the bestiary to the mix, Legend Core/Monster PDFs will cost 13$. If you can spare the extra 12$, I'd rather go directly to RQ6 for 25$ and skip Legend all together. In any case, you are in a very difficult position because if you make the wrong decision and do not pick the best game for you (whichever it is), you will be stuck with a great game instead.. I know, it suck being a BRP fan these days

Is there a good pdf preview (actual pages from the book) anywhere?

Pedro, I'm just taking a minute to tell you how good your book is. I must admit that I was very skeptical about yet another "Viking" book and one focusing on Iceland at that. I'm glad you proved me wrong.

Shame. There seems to be many BRP Fantasy derivative lately which is both good and bad I guess. Of course! I just hope it will stay either BRP or RQ6 in the end, or maybe Legend.

What? I thought this book was only describing a town tied with a scenario or two. What you describe Chaot is a lot more exciting and I am going to get it next time I go to my FLGS.

Now that I come to think of it, wasn't there suppose to be a full release of Classic Fantasy (as opposed to being a monograph)?

I very much like the clean look, and the art giving a bronze feel is reasonably good. There is two much blank spaces at some places (around the hoplite page 22 and the skills section header page 55) but generally the spacing is allright. Nice touch with the runes to identify the sections! I like the character skills (it gives me a nice "RQ3 good old days") and I definitely like the rearrangement of the characteristics in a more logical order. Without knowing how Fatigue works now, I would have like to see the penalties per level of exhaustion written on the sheet (so you don't have to rewrite the penalties everytime your fatigue level changes). A sheet on one page is also a bit cramped, sections about Professional Skills, Passions and Magical Skills are a bit small. My guess is that the second page is for equipments and notes. I also hope the full size sheet doesn't have such huge left and right margins (or top and bottom for that matter). I also like the renaming of a few skills. The creature stat block is very neat and in great RQ tradition, I like to see in the bestiary notes to play non-human. Unfortunately, I have a very negative comment about the preview. It is unfortunate that it was chosen to preview only 17 pages when in my sense a preview of 300 pages would have been a lot more appropriate. I even would have paid bucks for it...

Wouldn't that argument advocate for all the characteristics being rolled on 2d6+6 for humans?

Darn, my first disappointement about RQ6. I was so much hoping RQ6 would streamline this useless distinction. Oh well, it doesn't make or break the game.

Of the bunch I am interested in the following : •New edition of Call Of Cthulhu. I am not an avid fan of CoC but I think it is about time I put one on my shelf. •Mythic Iceland. Already have in PDF. Might buy the book as well. •Advanced Sorcery – A BRP magic book based on the system in Nephilim. I am curious about this one. •Magicworld and Superworld being released again! Both a big Hell yeah! if they are revamped. These three I might bite as well. •Secrets Of Tibet •Cthulhu By Gaslight •Atomic Age Cthulhu – 1950′s era fun.

Hey guys, John Taber was kind enough to summarize some seminars on his site http://usandacat.com/thelair/2012/dundracon-xxxvi-seminar-report/ including this : ------------------ What’s New At Chaosium Saturday 3:00 PM in 156 for 1 hours Presenter: Charlie Krank Description: Come and ask your questions of the demented minds behind the Call of Cthulhu and Basic Role Playing. My Take Charlie essentially sat down and went through a fantastically wonderful and extensive list of upcoming products. Here are some of the notes I took. These are in very rough order of release. •New edition of Call Of Cthulhu. •Cthulhu By Gaslight 3rd edition with TONS of new material by Ross. BIG HELL YEAH! •Mythic Iceland. •Two fiction anthologies called Extreme Planets and A Long Way Home. •Atomic Age Cthulhu – 1950′s era fun. •House Of R’Lyeh adventure. •Shaan – A Call Of Cthulhu campaign setting. •Advanced Sorcery – A BRP magic book based on the system in Nephilim. •Undead And Unbound – A fiction anthology where every story has a twist. 19 stories! I may have to get this one. •Magicworld and Superworld being released again! •Secrets Of Tibet – The monograph is getting the full book treatment like Morocco. Charlie then talked a lot about working with other developers and a particular company in France that has done some amazing work. It sounds like he is hoping he can make a deal with them that would let everyone partake of some Cthulhu goodness. My reaction after hearing this laundry list was…DAMN! This list is HUGE! My Grade: 8 out of 10. --------------- Magicworld and Superworld!!?? This one I was very surprise to see. Let's hope they are updated/new editions and not just a reformatted reprint.

This is exactly how I have been playing for decades in RQ, BRP, KAP, GURPS or HERO I agree except for the last sentence. It is true that you might extract a story element from a rule. When the system is good, it does it fact enhance the story. It is a feature, not a bug. That's why I don't see a direct gain of HQ over say HERO to play a super game. The great asset of HQ (narration), can be reproduced in HERO. I'd like to point out that we have been playing in very crunchy systems (a Champions campaign in HERO and a GURPS Warhammer campaign) and narration and roleplaying was a very heavy portion of our play time. Even in crunch time (mainly combat) in depth description of intent and colorful results supported by the rules and outcomes where the norm. The GURPS Warhammer game was very brutal and graphic, the Champions game was very high-flying and high-octane. HQ would have given us nothing more on both account and would have taken out all the tactical options and the precise depiction of powers (and yes, HERO and GURPS do support improvisational powers so contrary to popular belief, not everything has to be written on the sheet). Note though that I prefer crunchy games so obviously someone favoring rule light games might be put off by HERO or GURPS. Note also that as written, HERO, HQ and GURPS are all better suited for a super game because well BRP is underdevelopped on that front. If it was, BRP would in my opinion be better than HQ (playstyle preference) or GURPS (BRP just scale so much better than GURPS for high level supers). I am not sure it could acheive HERO's customization power though. I'd like to dispute that on two accounts. First, one can use the Circumstantial Action Modifiers in BGB. Sure it doesn't specifically talk about relationship but it is a very good mechanic to take it into account. Second, other BRP family games have Passions and Personality mechanics. Yes and no. The relative scale of power is almost always true. Hulk is stronger than the Thing who is stronger than Spider-Man. Mr.Fantastic is always the brightest of the 4 and Captain America is always the most charismatic leader. The only time it is not true, it's when there are special circumstances and plot devices. These can be dealt equally in BRP or HQ First, this is not what happens is comics, and second that is part of my problem with HQ. I don't want a game to tell me to ignore values just because it suits the story. If, as a GM, I need an element as important as Hulk's strength to be tempered, I will alsolutely make it a strong element of the story (what? Hulk has lost his strength!) and introduce the plot element and corresponding modifier to suite the purpose instead of looking at the pass-fail cycle and realizing that oh, well, Hulk is not so tough this time around so let's work my story around that rule mechanic. The second thing is that as we can rate Spidey, Thing and Hulk's strength, so can we rate Doomsday, Black Adam and Darkseid but not in HQ since thy are treated as mere resistance. HQ has huge advantages on other games and these are low prep time and the lack of need of define power sets or NPC stats. The pass and fail cycle can also help a GM guide the story. I don't see it as the best fit for the genre but it can emulate it if the playstyle it provides suite your needs. It just doesn't suite mine.

Emphasis mine. In what sense? I honestly don't see how the mechanics of HQ interact with my imagination differently the BRP's? In both cases, the GM and players have a story to tell and they use a set of rules to deliver it. Sorry, I don't quite follow you here. Would you mind elaborating? I totally agree... but this is equally true in HQ or BRP or HERO or GURPS or any RPG. If the story needs Spidey to beat Galactus, as a GM I'll make sure all the conditions are present so that it happens (bonuses because Mary-Jane is in direct danger, Galactus is already weakened by the hordes of aliens he had to decimate, Spidey put his hands on the specifically tuned alien weapon...). And there we totally disagree as I find the Pass-Fail Cycle to be an annoyance to me as a GM. I don't need a mechanic to tell me that the players are having it to easy and that I have to spike the game a bit. If I feel I should bring tougher challenges, I bring them without having a need for the system to trump the card. And as long as the game is great and that we are having fun, I might even be totally cool with it and decide not to bring tougher opponents/situations. Galactus might not be the best example because he is a walking plot device but this is another weak point of HQ for me. As a GM, I want to choose the opposition according to what the story needs and I want that opposition to be coherently represented from one scene to the other. In HQ (second edition), from one scene to another, depending how well or badly the players are doing lately, the resistance offered by the same opponent might differ widly. To maintain common sense, the GM has to find story rationales explaining the discrepencies. For me, this is working backward. Sure I could just ignore the pass-fail cycle but then I am left with undefined opponents. The genre is all about who is stronger than who and who is faster or tougher or has the most range with his telepathy and yes, the genre is also about incoherence about power levels from writers to writers! But generally speaking, everybody knows that Doomsday is stronger than Solomon Grundy and that Lady Shiva is a better martial artist than Deadshot but cannot compare with his marksmanship skills. HQ decided to more or less ignore that and this is another reason in my book why HQ sure doesn't fit the genre better. Note : Just quickly read my post. It may read rantish but this is not what I was trying to convey.

True. This is exactly what we see with HERO, GURPS, M&M and other more or less crunchy systems. Superworld was also built that way. I'll be the odd duck in the room here but I disagree with those who say that narrative systems like HQ are better at simulating four-color supers than simulationist systems. Sure, as written HQ is better than BRP simply because BRP is not really developped on that front. HQ, like most narrativist systems has it a bit easier because by its nature, it is very rule light (the "one rule to rule them all" approach) and for a game like this to work properly, it requests that GM and players alike very well know the genre played and fully collaborate to tell the tale. And this is exactly why I do not buy the narrative systems are better at simulating please insert than simulationist systems. In essence, my opinion is this, take the GM and players needed to successfully tell a tale in a good narrative system and put them in a good simulationist system and they will succeed as well. Actually very crunchy systems like HERO and GURPS also have mechanics to improvise powers/abilities/skills/whatnot not written on the character sheet. HERO specifically is very good at having Batman and Superman in the same game because what Supe will have in raw power, Bat will have in skills and gears. Which in any game, narrativist or simulationist, needs a good deal of GM/players storytelling collaboration.

I'll agree with those saying that a BRP Super project should start off Superworld instead of from the BGB. It could be from scatch as well but that would make for a lot more work. I will disagree though with the system's inability to produce high end games. BRP is very scalable and by just continuing the double every +8 progression on the SIZ chart you will end up with Spider-Man STR at around 70 and Superman at around 200. Within that range, the damage difference will be high enough that Supe will trash Spidey but also tight enough that he will not just vaporize him. Lethality of the system is an issue but there are easy work around (can't remember what was SW solution). The only draw back is the actual lack of complete and coherent power system.

It was mentioned up thread that the project was stopped

On the HERO Games forums someone asked about what would be HERO gamers second choice to run a super game (obviously assuming their first choice would be Champions). My answer to that would be either GURPS Supers (published 2010) or Superworld (published 1983!). It got me to open the Superworld PDF and remember that I liked the Action Rank system. I am sure you already know about it but a quick recap in a nutshell is everyone gets an action at DEX, DEX-10, DEX-20 and so forth until they reach 0 or lower. Actions are divided according to how long they take to achieve; the whole melee round (taking all your Action ranks), a full action (1 AR), a semi-action (that can be mixed with a quarter-action), a quarter action (that can be mixed with a semi-action or another quarter-action) and instantaneous. In that system, melee round movement is divided by action rank so if a character can fly 600m/mr and he has 3 AR, he can, as a full action fly 200m, 100m as a semi-action* or 40m as a quarter-action. *I just scanned in the book and I can't find the place where I got this number though. It might be more logical if a semi-action would be up to 150m (75%) and a quarter-action up to 50 (25%)

If narrative systems float your boat you might want to go with HQ but if you want a BRP feel, I'd'go with RQ : Empires (available for 1$ on DTRPG if I am not mistaken). All the rules to stat and play with all sort of organizations from guilds to empire (including all sort of maneuvering) and how players ifluence and interact in the political game

You either misunderstand what I was trying to say or mischieviously distort my meaning In all seriousness, I meant that other systems mostly have a "true way" of doing stuff around which maybe tons of options gravitate (HERO and GURPS have loads of options). In BRP, the "one true way" doesn't seem to be set as strongly (or rather the footprint of the immuable system is a lot smaller) and the BGB feels more like a collection of options to choose from. I am not saying it is a bug nor a feature but rather an explanation of why so many different iteration of the system float around. They are all distinguishly BRP based or influenced and yet they are all different.

I think we pretty much agree on how the Personality Traits are the most enjoyable as a mechanic. I also have no problem if it is decided by players and GM that the extreme ranges (below 10 and above 90 for example) are, to use a GURPS term, disadvantage territory where the GM might strongly suggest a course of action based on a very strong personality trait. It does demand great GM/player collaboration and trust though. I would have preferred to see them as an option in the character creation chapter but at least they are in the book and nothing prevents me from using them for players

Thank you for the clarification Rosen. I figured this is what you meant and I am now at peace again Actually, what I like about the Personality mechanic is that it helps define a mindframe for a character that might be very different than the player's. I personally perfer when a player decide how he will define his traits either by choosing one type of roll as described in BGB, by assigning himself the value or even by mix and matching. It thus give them the power to create the character they want and give them something to fall back on when they are not sure or they want to explore how there character could react to a situation. It can also be in my opinion a great tool to colour social conflicts and interractions. After all someone with a high level of Suspicion and a directed trait "Despise authority" might give strong indications (and bonuses) when the guards ask to surrender his weapon. I do not see/use this mechanic to limit players' freedom but on the contrary to empower them to influence results on how they should react in certain situations.

So I get into this thread telling myself "cool a conversation about social conflicts" and start reading the posts, some of the reading like a lecture on what must be done and above all what is wrong to do. Still, nothing wrong with a heated debate so I carry on reading until I get to this : Now that rubs me the wrong way. Especially from someone who publishes games and that I assume would prefer if people would not forget his books ever existed. I'll chalk it up to "in a heated debate this is not really what he meant" because I can respectfully tell you sir that if I ever have to forget a game ever existed, you will not be the one to tell me which one and KAP won't be the game I choose to forget.

True enough. Both HERO and GURPS use a table to correlate distance fallen and velocity in order to find out damage. Both the rules you quote, Falling and Grappling, are not really helpful to translate movement (velocity) into damage. Falling uses distance fallen (which in my opinion doesn't make sense) and grappling does imply velocity damage but velocity is unknown. The only hint that we have in the BGB is the Leap powers who tells us that every level add to STR+SIZ on the Damage Bonus table. Assuming every leap takes the same amount of time irrespective of distance leapt (unrealistic but a simplification that is I believe acceptable) levels equal velocity with the caveat that depending on type of jump (vertical, standing or running) the distance leapt isn't the same. Based on that every 16m or 32m or 48m (16 levels) roughly gives +1d6 of damage. Now depending on how long does it time to make a jump (BRP says between a few seconds and a combat round), velocity could be calculated and a table for falling damage could be made.

I agree with Simon. Progression seems off and damage way too high.