Atgxtg

Well, technically no, but functionally yes. Chaosium produced a Eternal Champion supplement called the Shattered Isle. I guess the idea was to combine Stormbinger and Hawkmoon RPGs into the full fledged Multiverse. But, the supplement is pretty much a "Granbretan Special". Included within were: some new rules, notably aerial combat rules new technology, with vehicles such as including tanks and ornithopers, a short story guidelines for inter dimensional travel to the Young Kingdoms and Tragic Millennium Earth A series of adventures that take place on Tragic Millennium Eire (with notes for generating Eirish characters). Something like 50 different Orders of the Beast for Granbretan Characters, each with notes of their duties and characteristic modifiers (i.e. Bulls add an extra +1D6 to STR and +2 to SIZ).

Yes I remember them. I still have my copy of Hawkmoon, and it's supplement. It was very similar to Strombringer on purpose, for obvious reasons. As far as reprinting it goes, not likely. What I've been told was that back when RQ and AD&D were the big FRPGs, Chaosium and TSR both contacted Michael Moorcock and asked for permission to use Elric in their games. He very nicely said yes to both of them, and not anticipating the longevity of RPGs, let them do so for free, figuring that it would be a one time thing. A few decades and five editions later, he made a deal with Mongoose, which gave them the rights to at least some of his Eternal Champion stuff, and closed the door on Chaosium's Strombringer franchise. It's possible that they could get the rights to reprint the old stuff, or even do a new edition, but they would probably have to pay to get the rights back, and Moorcock's stuff isn't as popular or well known today as it was back in the 80s, and might not be profitable.

I don't see it as a problem, just something that a GM should be aware of. It only becomes a problem if the GM runs lots of combat, or ambushes. But "eaten by the party trickster" , is a new one on me, and I love to hear about it sometime. Maybe we should have a thread for memorable PC deaths. Probably some good stories out there.

It is a valid statement of intent. The difficulties lies in just who has to declare first ,and the inability to react to what's happening . The side that declares first is at a distinct disadvantage here. Especially if it's the same side (PCs or NPCS) all the time. I much prefer RQ3 on this for two reasons. First, the statements of intent don't have to be as precise, the idea being that other people don't know exactly what you are doing. Secondly, you can alter your intent by paying a 3SR penalty. So in RQ3 the other guy might change his mind and close the distance. and attack, if he has enough SR left.

Statement of Intent comes before Strike Ranks. So to pull this off someone would have to hear that the opponent was going to stand his ground and prepare and attack on someone who moves up to him, before his statement. Even then it only really makes a difference if moving up increased your SR to worse than your opponent, or if it prevented you from attacking at all. Personally, I would think that if moving 2 yards is "free" then the opponent should be able to react to this and add a "five foot step" to his attack. It's not like people in melee actually stand still in the same spot.

Excellent idea! Consider it done.

That's probably why RQ3 had the "attacking on the run option", where you ignored you SIZ SR modifer on a charge, but lost your parry/dodge. Maybe that option, or something like it is forthcoming?

Hold it! Yu said this was the RuneQuest forum and that I was posted wasn't RuneQuest. It was RuneQuest, admit it. No, you're muddling it. I didn't mention demon armor at all. What I did mention, and it is revlant to this thread, is the risk factor inherent in long or multiple combats and how it can derail a campaign if PCs die off too often. Everyone seemed to see and agree with that. Then you said it isn't a problem because you always give your groups access to a high powered item that case raise the dead characters. I pointed out that the reason why it isn't a problem is because you houseruled that item. You replied that you didn't house-rule anything and that it was all part of Glorantha and RuneQuest is set in Glorantha. I responded that not all RuneQuest is set in Glorantha, not all Chasoium D100 RPGs are RuneQuest, gave examples to illustate my point and maintained that items that can raise the dead are very rare in RuneQuest, and that giving one out to every group early on is still houserulling things. You told me that this was the RuneQuest forum and that my examples didn't belong in the RuneQuest forum, despite the fact that several of them were RuneQuest game settings. I raised the fact that supplments such as QuestWorld and RuneQuest Vikings are indeed RuneQuest, and that the community decided months ago to keep the old and new RuneQuest stuff in the same forums. So now you say cut it because this thread is for the new RQG, and accuse me of muddling the discussion with complaints about survivability without demon armor from Strombringer. I'm not muddling it. I never raised the issue of demon armor in this thread, you did. What I did raise was how crticals are deadly (no surprise) and just how often PCs can expect to be on the receiving end, and that GMs should keep that in mind. Now you have a solution to the problem, but not every GM in every RQG campaign does what you do and hand out a powerful item that can raise the dead to every one of his groups early on. In fact I doubt many do. I doubt there is a note in the rules that GMs should put a Truestone loaded with healing magic for his PCs to find. I don't recall seeing such a item in the old RQ adventures. Doy you think that every RQG GM should hand out such an item?

Do we know if this is the same table from RQ3? Is SIZ 8 50kg, SIZ 16 100kg, and SIZ 24 200kg? The old one in RQ2 was based around a 3D6 SIZ, so this is probably something different. I'm just wondering about the progression.

Yes, the is the RuneQuest forum, not the Glorantha forum. QuestWorld was a supplement for RuneQuest 2, which is RuneQuest, not BRP. RuneQuest Vikings and Land of the Ninja were both supplements for RQ3, which is RuneQuest, not BRP. Now months ago I inquired if people wanted to split off the older RQ games and make this forum exclusive to RQG, but the overwhelming consensus was: "No, it all still RuneQuest."

RQG is in Glorantha, but not all RuneQuest is in Glorantha (i.e. QuestWorld, Thieves World, RQ Vikings and Land of the Ninja, etc). and not all RQ related games have easy ways to come back from the dead (Stormbringer, ElfQuest, Ringworld). And yes you did "houserule" something. You mentioned that you " make sure early on they get access to a magic item that gives them resurrection." So your houseruling that the PCs get a Ressurection item, and they get it early. And items that can raise the dead, aren't all that common to begin with.

Yup. Just look at D&D, where being dead is pretty much treated as a temporary condition. The scene from Monty Python and the Holy Grail comes to mind. Depends on how easy/often it happens. It's a tough choice. Make it too deadly and it becomes unsustainable. Make it too safe and it can become tedious and loose all sense of challenge. Me, I walk a tightrope. That is I keep it deadly, but try to mitigate things by trying to give the PCs the upper hand most of the time. I rarely run ambushes, since in most RPGs it's way too easy to kill off PCs.

That the reason why PC deaths haven't derailed your campaign is because of things you've houseruled as a GM, not because it doesn't exist. You've already taken steps to mitigate it. Also not every RQ/BRP game has that as an option, so GMs should be aware that the more dice rolling that goes on the more PCs will die.

You can get Greg Stafford's (rest in peace, Greg) official errata for KAP5 at his Pendragon website ): http://www.gspendragon.com/pendragon_errata.html KAP5.1 is basically KAP5 updated with the corrections from KAP5, KAP5 was Nocturnal first Pendragon book, and who ever edtited the book made some assumptions which had to be fixed. Here are the highlights of stuff from KAP5 that was fixed or changed with the errata/KAP5.1: In KAP 5 You cannot use Glory Points to raise attributes, traits (and possibly skills) above the normal maximums. Fixed in the errata. Glory Awards table missing Knights who split their combat skills against multiple foes could only damage one of them if they win, returned to normal in the errata. Grapple. Whole thing was completely redone. Rebated Weapons and Withheld Blows: Updated. Now either does half damage, and doing both does quarter damage. You still use the full total for determining knockdown. The double d20 method of randomly determining an opposing ability score was added to the core book. Better guidelines given on when to uncheck the Chirguery needed box (reach half hit points) Axe Damage updated/changed from doing an extra die against shields to the defender only gets 1d6 protection from his shield (instead of 6). Ditto Great Axe Rules for getting someone out of a melancholic state revised. Glory from landholding capped I don''t have KAP 5.2 yet, but from what I've read the changes are mostly in layout and art. The biggest rule change is that income from manors has been raised from £6 to £10 to better fit in with the book of the estate.

The magical healing is the reason why. Run a game without healing an where the dead stay dead and it would be a different story.

Actually the risk factor is rather small in most fights but it's still there, and that's usually enough to keep things exciting (it's really perceived risk that's import not actual risk, but thats another subject). It's just the inherent risk factor in dice rolls. Something that has very low percentage of occurring will eventually happen with enough attempts. A GM should keep that in mind. Too much rolling can lead to accidental PC fatalities. Ironically, it had lead me to atheroy that run counter to conventional wisdom. Namely that as PCs get better the game can get more lethal, not less-becuase the PCs have to face better skilled adversaries. Yes, that can be true, depending on circumstances and setting. In Glorantha theres enough magic to bring people back from the dead. Depends on who they are. Either way their death doesn't risk derailing a campaign the way a PC death can. My point was that is can be difficult to maintain a campaign if PCs die frequently, which will happen with a lot of combat rolls.

I think the change was to help speed of chargen, and to ensure that PKs weren't dysfunctional. Back in KAP1 I'd often see People roll up PKs that, by the luck of the dice, were practically unplayable. Or, a bad Loyalty (Liege) roll might force a player to age his character for years, or stay a squire longer so as to reach the required 15. It also helps to prevent super characters. Oddly enough its not high Characteristics that are a problem, so much as high traits, and the related glory awards. I've seen lucky players end up netting both the Chivalry and Religious bonuses, plus a couple of notable passions to net over 300 glory per year at the start. With only moderate adventuring they will earn 1000 Glory every three years-to start! Down the road a bit, it tends to be every other year, and all those extra glory points really amp up the characters.

Yes, Christianity got subdivided, and they introduced a few new Regions, too.

I'm not sure if you get my drift. Let's assume that the typical NPC opponent is at 50% skill. That's a 3% chance for a critical. Now if you assume a group of 5 PCs, and that they each get attacked once per session, then on average, a PC will be on the wrong end of a critical every other session. If we assume that a typical PC is at 75% in his parry/dodge, that still leave you with one maiming or fatality every 8 sessions. Now if you game once a week that works out to a PC's death or dismemberment every other month. If they get attacked more often than once a session the mortality rates go up. That might be a bit too much to be able to sustain a campaign. Thankfully, RQ has all sort of Healing magic including bring the dead back to life, and that helps a great deal with that.

That's an interesting take on it. It's not how most people view it, but I think having the healing spell take effect at one magic point per Strike Rank would be kinda neat. People could see large wounds close over a couple of seconds/Strike Ranks.

It doesn't make it wrong either. Going back to the way things always have been is really the only logical move we have, unless something is specifically noted as changed. I can see the reasoning for weakening criticals with impaling weapons, though. It's pretty much an autokill if it hits head chest or abdomen, otherwise it will sever a limb, and probably take someone out of the fight. Now there is nothing "wrong" with that, but it can lead to PCs getting killed off just from the laws of probability.

Yeah, but most RQ related games since RQ3 tend to tone crtitals down a little, and RQG does divert from RQ2/3 in several ways.

Thanks Rosen, that looks like an interesting idea. Looks like they have a free Quickstart, too.

Thanks Nick, I think that probably is the best looking incarnation, and the Dharzi stuff seems new to me. It definitely gives the forces of Law something to fight back with- maybe a little too much.

Probably the the earlier passage. In virtually every other version of RQ a critical impale would do 2x Max plus damage modifier (if any). The only reason why I can't be 100% positive is that RQG has some differences from previous editions.