ffilz

Hmm, when I was doing my RQ1/2 comparison, I didn't read this as suddenly requiring a roll on every spell cast, so I didn't note that as a difference. I read that as reminding that when a spell is opposed it always fails on a 96-00, but I see this reading that it requires a roll for every spell cast to check for failure. Difference duly noted... Little details like this I rarely note because I have always played RQ1 with a few things borrowed from RQ2 (more since I've done my comparison). When changing editions of a game system for an ongoing campaign, one will have to deal with how the changes impact the existing characters. For me it's easy... Stick with RQ1... 🙂 Ok, I'll borrow things here and there from RQ2, RQ3, and maybe even RQG... Or I might use the pre-RQ3 Sorcery write-up from Gregg Stafford that he published in The Wild Hunt...

Oh, you failed to disappoint me... While my post had a hopeful tone that we could get a "differences" document, I acknowledge all of the above. So yea, it would be cool if someone took the time to point out the page numbers in GC that have material not in RQC, I get that there's little incentive to put in that effort. Who knows, maybe I'll do it. In the meantime, if you want the material, buy the GC PDFs, and if you find something that you want from them that you can't find in the RQC, print out the page(s)... Sorry if I didn't sound sufficiently grounded in the reality of the situation... 🙂 I totally understand in this case. If resources were to be spent on getting old material back in print, there's much more worthy fish to fry, like the RQ3 material that WASN'T rehash. Or old fanzines. Or stuff from Gregg's notes (yea, I can wish all I want that material would be published for RQ1 or RQ2, but yea, it's going to be published for RQG, still, the more of it that comes to light in some way, the richer we will all be). Actually, I'm super pleasantly surprised we got POD for the RQC... I honestly didn't expect many people would want to purchase RQ1 in print... Frank

Yea, it would probably be way more cost effective to take the bits of the Gloranthan Classics that are NOT included somewhere in the RQ Classics line and put them in a single document. Perhaps it would not need the same production quality (not intending to replicate any specific product). I'd certainly love such a product, but even with this thought it may still not be worth the investment to get the material ready in a desirable way (I mean all the pages with material not in the RQ Classics line COULD be extracted from the Gloranthan Classics PDFs and put into a single PDF which would then be small enough folks could just print it on their own, no need for any of the original publishing files...). In the meantime, maybe someone could actually post page ranges of each Gloranthan Classics product that aren't in RQ Classics... And maybe that's already been done here somewhere... Could be a nice thing to throw up on the Wiki somewhere...

Last week I actually looked at the charts in Pavis, Gateway to Adventure. The Sartar Companion has encounter charts for Sartar. But comparing the Borderlands and Pavis, Gateway to Adventure tables, I see significant differences that suggest that encounter tables could be different by different regions. I think the same will be true of Sartar. Some of the differences will the the makeup of origin of human encounters which could easily be handled on sub-tables. Other differences will be because certain creatures are prominent only in small regions. Then there's the possibility that encounter tables should be different depending on the era of the campaign... For example, the Borderlands encounter tables represent the time of Lunar occupation. Before or after that, the human encounters should be different. Another consideration is how the vision of Gloranthan fauna has changed over time. The RQ1/2 encounter tables don't include dinosaurs while the Borderlands and later ones do.

Put this up on JC and I'll buy it... Since you've got night split into travel and camp, I'd add day camp also (for those who need to camp to rest). Forage might be an interesting variation also, but may add too many columns... Prax probably needs several encounter tables, and different regions need some uniqueness to tables, though some of that could probably be coded into sub-tables.

Hmm, here's another thought on newtling swimming from Apple Lane: "Underground streams, usable only by newtlings, lead to cave sections 7,11, and 20." The section on Underwater Combat in Borderlands grants ducks and newtlings the same abilities of no penalties under water or out of water. The Borderlands description of Ducks includes being able to hold their breath for 6 minutes. I'm inclined to treat ducks and newtlings the same for all underwater considerations.

Yea, I seem to remember an early Q&A about Chalana Arroy and chaos and they weren't even allowed to attack chaos creatures. Yea, Advice from Rurik in Wyrms Footnotes #13. An exception is made for undead with the note that very orthodox Chalana Arroy adherents might not even take up arms against undead.

Yes it does, it's described as a fish head. But I've never had the sense that newtlings had fish like heads. With the more setting knowledge since Apple Lane was first published, the statue is probably a representation of their river spirit rather than necessarily a depiction of a member of their "tribe". I'm not sure what I've done for newtling underwater stamina in the past, but I'd be inclined to give them similar or better than ducks, though on the other hand, RQ1 gives newtlings only 80% swimming to ducks 90%, so maybe they shouldn't be as good.

But you don't need a Chalana Arroy member for healing. Anyone can pick up healing, and there are other cults you can get the rune magic from. My play group has an Aldryami which is a pretty effective healer, now of course you can argue what is an Aldryami doing among non-Aldryami, but at least there the strictures aren't as rigid as Chalana Arroy, plus I run a Glorantha that doesn't assume all the changes to Glorantha from what was presented in RuneQuest 1st edition... And yea, if you want a more clan oriented healer, sounds like Ernalda may be a good choice (of course I'm hampered without an RQ2 Ernalda write up...).

I think the big question is does a CA have a viable role in your campaign? I tend to run old school "adventuring" campaigns and I can no longer justify a CA being interested in doing that so I recommend against CA for PCs. If your campaign has a different focus, and as mentioned above, the other players are also on board with a CA putting restrictions on their actions, then there are some great suggestions in this thread.

Cool! And thanks for posting a high enough resolution picture that I can add this to my "maps" folder.

Oh, that would be cool. Understandable that reprinting Foes would not be a priority. A scan WOULD be cool since it would allow printing out a single page to be used at the table and marked up as critters take damage. Frank

Oh, yea. Once I switched to the "all digital" I didn't actually pay attention to what was and was not printed.

RQ1 was part of the kick starter, Gateway Bestiary was not. I guess I need to go purchase that PDF (or did I miss a kick starter update or something?). I wish FOES was available also, actually what I REALLY wish was available was the program used to generate the stats for FOES...

Sorry, I always get Footprints and Footnotes mixed up... I think part of it is based on meanings of the words, one would actually expect Footnotes to be the newer thing based off the original as in a footnote to it...

I'll have to get a couple of those, Soloquest and Old School Resource Pack to cover what I don't already have in print 🙂 Hmm, you missed Wyrm's Footprints... I'd buy that too... Frank

Oh, good, I wasn't sure about the licensing, glad that's solid. The TrollPak map would be a good one to get up on Redbubble. While RQ Cities is generic, it is an update of a very well regarded early supplement for RPGs so it would have appeal beyond the RQ/Glorantha community, otherwise I agree with most of the "not worth reprinting" (though for completion sake it would be cool if someday we saw PDFs of everything but get the low priority). With a Dorastor supplement in Johnstown Compendium, Dorastor would be nice to reprint in support of it. There's so much Praxian material in current production that the Sun County/Strangers in Prax/Shadows on the Borderland trilogy might get sort of lost. I'm hopeful that RQG cults will be more easily usable in RQ1/2 than the RQ3 cults, so I don't have the least problem with not reprinting the RQ3 cult resources...

I really wasn't trying to gripe... I was just noting that the realities of POD production mean that poster maps are considerably more expensive while physical books are quite competitive in price to the originals. Really you folks are doing a great job and I'm glad to see modern POD production being used to return all of these titles to print. And hey, I really can't complain, maybe you folks HAVE put out new RQ1 content, it's not quite clear if Sea Cave is RQ1 or RQ2... The monster sheets used are John T. Sapienza's first attempt (dated 1978) and pre-RQ2... Seriously you folks are among the best at making early RPG material available. Without your efforts I would be very challenged to run RQ1 on Roll20, and now folks can get a nicely bound hard copy if they prefer. I agree that rolled rather than folded is superior, though I appreciate having my folded originals since they are easier to store with the books and put in backpacks and such. If I was inclined to put more maps up on the walls, then clearly the rolled would be superior. And obviously you can turn a rolled poster into a folded one... Oh, and I totally understand the Redbubble prices. Yes, printing posters on demand can't compete with offset printing a run of 1000s. Book printing is more competitive because the shear volume of POD printing of books has led to development of the most efficient way to do it to keep prices affordable. And hey, get license to the RQ3 era material and I might actually spring for a Redbubble version of the RQ3 Trollpak map which is my "canon" map for the part of Glorantha MOST of my gaming happens in... Maybe even a framed copy since I would actually want to put that one on the wall. I don't put my original on the wall because I use it too much in play. Yes, I am tickled pink too. And I hope the continued attention to availability of the early material is cool. Check it out. Enjoy it. Play it (even RQ1!). Meanwhile, eventually I will find cause to purchase some of the RQG adventures and spend the time to back port them to my RQ1.5 campaign... Tales of Sun County looks like it might have potential for my campaign for example. Rick could disappoint me more by making the RQ3 material available in PDF and POD any time he wants 🙂 I'm sure I'd have to complain about the improved quality of any of the RQ3 boxed sets in POD! What are they thinking, nicely bound books printed on paper that won't tear if you look at it! 🙂 🙂 🙂 Hmm, I should get a Cults of Prax cover mug...

Too bad the poster maps are about the cost of the original boxed set for most of them... I assume there's just no reasonable way to have these sorts of things POD for a few bucks to more closely compare to their contribution to cost of the original boxed sets. Thankfully I have all the original poster maps... 🙂

Cool, I'd love to see the sales numbers on POD RQ1. I might have to get a copy just to have a backup of my original...

Currently running AD&D module UK5 Eye of the Serpent heavily interpreted into my version of Glorantha under RQ1 (1978) rules. Bigger picture the party is heading towards Pavis having started with Rainbow Mounds from Apple Lane and followed by Lair of the White Wyrm from White Dwarf magazine.

I've always loved it, but then I've always loved Wind Cave. Someday I need to run an expanded Dyskund Caverns using my poster map of Wind Cave from 1978, or maybe I should get a more current map, the mapped portion of the cave has doubled or more since 1978... Frank

Obviously I missed that the extras had been added to the RQ Classics reprints, so if it's really just the cults, I think it's actually worth getting the Cult Compendium even if you have Cults of Prax and Cults of Terror just to get ALL the cults in one volume (plus you won't have to look for where the additional material that was collated into the Compendium is located among your other stuff). I really should get the Gloranthan Classics PDFs to supplement my print books (and just so folks know how worthwhile the Cults Compendium is, note that I have it in both soft and hard cover...). On the other hand, a part of me would love to see a PDF with just the 8 cults... But the value of that as a product compared to the resources to pull it together aren't worth it... And I look forward to hearing more about the new Cults book. If it's got cults that weren't published for RQ2, I look forward to seeing if it's a good source for back porting cults to RQ2. Frank

Well, gee, I guess that would have been easy to look up... 🙂 Thanks for the shortcut... Now sometime I need to sit down and read all that extra material (me being a luck soul who caught these in print even though I wasn't actively running RQ at the time). And here's to hoping that someday that supplemental material could be pulled out to make it easily available to those who have the original RQ2 publications or the re-releases... Frank

I'm curious about all the additions to the Gloranthan Classics books. I know Cult Compendium has cults compiled from Cults of Prax, Cults of Terror, Pavis, Big Rubble, Troll Pak, and one or two from other sources that aren't part of the RQ Classics re-releases. What other add on bits are in the other volumes?