LivingTriskele

RQ Monsters is OGL, at least the version in the SRD is.

Are you talking about the monsters in the core rule book or 'Monsters' the separate hardbound book? I have the SRD for both-- every page of the SRD for the core rule book (as far as I can tell) states 'This section is designated as Open Content', while I've found no such statement on any page of the 'RuneQuest Monsters' SRD. Even the front page of the actual text states 'This game product contains no Open Game Content'. A potential bummer. Same thing goes with the RQ Companion. I'd actually hoped to utilize some of the alternative magic systems in the Companion, but as far as I can tell Rune Magic is the only OGC. Worst case scenario-- I make up my own, which could be fun in its own right, though rather more time consuming. I'd hoped to finish this thing by December...

So I went ahead and asked Matthew Sprange of Mongoose Publishing and here is his response-- (unfortunately I'm realizing as I write this that RQ Monsters is not OGC)

If something is Open Content, yes, you can use it!

Thanks for the responses-- so it sounds like they work pretty well together--with magic being maybe a bit on the stronger side. I'm giving my players the freedom to create their own professions (choose whatever skills they want to spend their EDU-derived skill points on) if they make characters without powers. If they want one of those three powers they'll be restricted to a power-specific profession and its respective available skills to choose from. For example the Magician profession in my setting is composed mainly of knowledge-based skills, whereas the Thee'Ahki Knight (using Psychic Abilities) has a more militant skill-base (kind of like a fantasy Jedi). I'm thinking that limiting/dictating skill choice for power-wielding characters will provide a little balance where appreciated. What do you think?

I'm planning on running a fantasy BRP game and I'm considering allowing players to use either Magic, Psychic Abilities, or Sorcery. Can anyone tell me if they are equal in efficacy, or unbalanced (is anyone one of them more powerful than the others)? Thanks.

This is what I came up with for the character generation notes I'm preparing for my players:

Age and Education: Choose an age between 18 and 23 for a base EDU of 10. You can modify your EDU at a rate of 3 Characteristic points per level, but it can be no higher than your Age –5. EDU is important because your initial (professional) skill points are equal to your EDU x 20.

Other Age Options:

15 Max EDU 10 (-60% Skill Points)

16 Max EDU 11 (-40% Skill Points)

17 Max EDU 12 (-20% Skill Points)

28-33 +1 EDU (+20% Skill Points)

38-43 +2 EDU (+40% Skill Points)

48-53 +3 EDU (+60% Skill Points)

Note: Deficient skill points for youth are restored yearly as the character ages.

Profession Bonus

Cop +3

Scientist +5

I hadn't considered allowing for professional bonuses-- is this a house rule?

Thanks for sharing!

Yeah, thanks, I got to be thinking about it and dropped the points back to 24. I'm basing professional skill points off of EDU so I don't think it will be neglected.

Incidentally, I think I've noticed a typo in the book--page 19 “….should assign a value to EDU based on your character’s age (described in Step Eight on page 24)”

I couldn't find that info in Step Eight on page 24.

I'm planning on using both the optional point-buy system and the EDU Characteristic. From what I can tell EDU is determined by age (which is rolled) and then modifiable with points at a value of 3. EDU is supposed to start at character age minus 5 correct?

I'd rather have everyone start with an equal amount of Characteristic points and skill points--since rolling age has such an effect on EDU, which in turn effects the number of skill points, it sort of defeats the purpose of the point-buy system. Please, correct me if I'm reading this wrong.

I'm considering allowing the players to choose an age between 18 and 23 with a base EDU of 10, modifiable up to their age minus 5. Instead of starting them with 24 points to spend on Characteristics I'll give them 30, since they have an extra Characteristic to spend points on. Does this seem fair?

Does wearing armor impact spell-casting ability? I haven't found any mention that it does.

And it doesn't look like flails are particularly hard to parry or block (which I think is the intention of the weapon). Am I missing some details regarding use of arms and armor?

Thanks.

Sorry guys, I've been trying to follow the arguments here and the legalese is labyrinthine... I'm writing a BRP fantasy Monograph. I'd like to use the basic structure of some of the creatures from the MRQ Monsters book to build my own menagerie. Providing I alter them slightly this shouldn't be a problem (?) I'm also wondering if I can transcribe/rename some of the spells from the The Bronze Grimoire.

Okay, so I dragged my books out of the basement and sat down with Edred Thorsson's Futhark: A Handbook of Rune Magic. There are some runes in the illustration I can't identify but towards the end it definitely says "bullsh*t with magic assh*les..." (I put the * as not to offend anyone).

This artist was one of my favorites. I think he passed away a while ago, but am not sure.

Ah, the good old days, when we weren't so concerned with game mechanics but rather who got to wear the French maid outfit, and who got to wear the rubber Bullwinkle mask with the orange gag ball in its mouth...

No, actually we would both read to decompress before going to bed and she'd noticed the page while I was flipping through the book...

Heh, I just noticed the illustration on page 365, of the sorcerer-- this is a reprint from another book. I can't remember which. I do remember lying in bad with my girlfriend from way back when, who had an appreciation for many Pagan ideas. She read those runes verbatim, and if I recall, the message is pretty hilarious. I don't think Chaosium would have printed it (twice) if they had known. I can't tell for sure--will have to dig the older RQ stuff out of the basement to get a better look, just to make sure...

I've been wanting to do a BRP based skirmish game for a while, and have just never gotten to it.

This sounds cool--would love to hear more about it if you put it together.

Even when we used miniatures, we never used hex sheets or grids and we never, ever worked out ranges. We played a fast and easy combat with approximate movement, reasonable missile fire and spells and so on.

Dispensing with hex sheets and grids actually sounds pretty liberating to me. I've never played any war games but can appreciate the artistry that goes into some of the dioramas.

Yeah, I appreciate the fact that it's sort of left open to interpretation. I have a closet full of Dwarven Forge Master Maze tiles from my 3.5 days. Each 1" square equals about five feet. I suppose I can fudge it a little bit and assume each unit of movement equals 5 feet instead one yard/meter. Either that or discard the whole battle mat thing entirely and use rulers on custom-made terrain. Hmmm... that actually sounds fun. My wife is going to love me when I turn our kitchen table into a miniature Mirkwood...

I confess, I enjoy playing with miniatures. Most of my battle mats have either 1" squares or hexes. I'm just curious what other people use.

And off the topic, are the ranges for ranged weapons given in meter/yards?

:thumb:

I understand that BRP is not OGL, but MRQ is. Does this mean that writers of official BRP supplements can incorporate aspects of MRQ (for example variants on MRQ magic systems)?

That's why you should consider what system you want to write for before you go for a project.

Amen.

I submitted if for 3.5, but then 4th was announced. I'm grateful for opportunity, nonetheless.

I am not so sure that there's a huge market for a superhero game that's not Mutants & Masterminds or Champions.

I've looked at both of these games pretty extensively. They have dedicated followings but I think that a well-supported series of BRP superhero supplements could easily give them a run for their money. Champions (or rather Hero System) is simply too complex for a lot of people, not to mention that combat takes forever. M&M is solid and simpler than Champions (not to mention beautifully produced) but I have a vague recollection of encountering some arbitrary rule elements, like Strength being a factor in energy projection (somebody correct me if I'm wrong).

Is there any way to subscribe to a thread that you've already responded to (but forgot to subscribe to)?

By the way, thanks for putting this together!

Wow, that's cool. I definitely want to hear about that when you're done. Thanks.

I'm curious about this as well. I've been given the go-ahead to write a 4th Edition Dungeons & Dragons mini-campaign for Necromancer Games, but honestly have a serious problem warming up to 4th Edition. I know a professional writer goes where the money is--it's just hard to give up one of your babies to a system you'll probably never play.

It makes even more sense to include those in setting- or genre-specific books, though.

Is that the direction Chaosium plans on taking (genre-specific books and whatnot)? My biggest concern regarding BRP is that it ends up not getting the attention it deserves. I really hope they support this to the nines.

Personal opinion aside, I think the inclusion of an optional Advantage/Disadvantage system might help to make the system more attractive to people who appreciate such things.

Which two supplements are you guys talking about? I went to Chaosium's website and found 'Ashes to Ashes' and 'Berlin (#?)' as downloadable pdfs, but didn't see anything for paper publication. I'm hoping for more spells, and powers, that kind of thing...