Jeff

8 hours ago, Robert said:

The Open Game License doesn't expire on content that has been released under its terms.

Per section 4

4. Grant and Consideration: In consideration for agreeing to use this License, the Contributors grant You a perpetual, worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive license with the exact terms of this License to Use, the Open Game Content.

Actually it does. Mongoose may have said its license was perpetual, but it's license with Issaries was not perpetual. Mongoose did not have the ability to issue a perpetual license to Third Parties, only a license with a duration equal to its own right to use the IP. So Section 4 was a bit of an exaggeration. 

Think of this like subletting a property you are renting on a monthly basis from another party. You might tell your subletter that their lease is perpetual, but if your landlord ends your lease, both you and your subletter are out.

2 hours ago, Joerg said:

For some reason, two kaiju fighting mano-a-mano has lots of knockbacks but hardly any hit location damage. Maybe a tentacle or two flying off, but never a limb when the total quantity is six or less. Probably lots of parries.

While that shouldn't really be the case - there may be situations where a heroquester may take on a virtual stature on par with that of the Black Eater -

I am not quite sure what you are suggesting. Are you proposing to use HQG for such conflicts inside a RQG game (let's say you found another Faceless Statue and direct it against the Watchdog of Corflu), or are you proposing that RQG heroquesting rules should provide a solution for such out of context altercations?

Yes, the HeroQuest 2 or HQG rules allow to have an opposed roll to decide the outcome of that battle. RQG has the Battle skill, too, and maybe that is good enough for a spectator battle between two kaiju-sized opponents.

 

Not sure about that. If you quest say along the path of Orlanth vs. Sh'harkar'zeel (add consonants or apostrophs to improve canonical spelling as required), either you remain Orlanth in the conflict and keep the dragon in the Mover of Heavens role, and behead the dragon, or you don't and may have to use the Enkoshons/Aroka method to deal with the dragon, or some other trick the enemies of the EWF figured out. Or you get eaten or grilled.

 

At one (I think still Hero Wars) games at Tentacles convention run by Greg, our party quested the Plundering of Aron quest, and when it came to the Sivin contest, I announced that my Helamakt warrior would perform the Sivin feat. Rather than rolling any dice, Greg said "that's what Helamakt does", described the outcome briefly, and we went on to the next stage.

 

My point isn't that RQ can't handle those fights, but merely that the GM shouldn't be rolling against the GM. The rules are intended for the players too... well, play. Not for the GM to try to figure out whether the Crimson Bat can defeat Cthulhu.

12 minutes ago, styopa said:

Ie scary, monstrous creatures were....too scary and monstrous?  7000kg giant has only 2x the body hp of a 70kg adventurer?

That's the same sort of logic that gave D&D the DDG book with gods with hp.  I mean, why should they be frankly impossible to kill, they're only gods....?

When in IRL, fights between larger creatures like bull elephants or sperm whales and giant squid generally go on LONGER (and are more often immediately inconclusive) than fights between smaller creatures like shews or ferrets which are over pretty quickly.

 

I'll save you all the the replies: "It doesn't have to make logical sense because there are dragons and magic, duh"  LOL, RQ's equivalent to "A wizard did it"

The primary purpose of the rules for the game designers is to allow player characters (who are mainly human sized) to interact with NPCs (who might be small or gigantic), often through fighting. If the primary purpose of the rules for you is to model fights BETWEEN giant squids and whales, then I can't help you.

6 hours ago, Mankcam said:

I really didn't see a need for going back to how HP were calculated in RQ2, considering since the mid 1980s we have been calculating it as (SIZ + CON)/2 for RQ3, and almost every other BRP game.

I guess it means less conversion for RQ2 material to be used in RQG games, but that's about it.

I also suspect that players care little how the HP are calculated, just as long as they have enough of them!

Actually, this was a recommendation from Greg which I agreed wholehearted with. In RQ3, large monsters had an insurmountable number of hit points. Giants and dragons - creatures with a ton of armor and deadly attacks, gained too many hit points. The conclusion was that the total hit points per monsters made more sense in RQ2 and better reflected Greg and Sandy's vision of those monsters, than in RQ3.

Just now, Uthred said:

So it would be fair to say that the statement of intent is descriptive rather than prescriptive? 

In the Statement of Intent, everyone says what they intend to do. What actually happens gets resolved in the next phases. Think of it like the game Diplomacy - every writes out their moves, but what actually happens gets resolved afterwards. In Diplomacy that resolution is simultaneous - in RQG it happens in order of strike rank.

9 hours ago, Uthred said:

Do you have a page/rules reference for that by any chance? It seems logical that this is how it works but there doesnt seem to be anything about changing your action after you state your intent in Phase 1. The +5 for changing to a different weapon seems to be simply the cost of doing so rather than permission to change intent. I'm going to run it that you can change actions but an actual textual reference would be great. 

I certainly didn't put something in the rules requiring that. The Statement of Intent is an opportunity for everyone to quickly remind themselves what they are doing and when it will happen. I find it a useful opportunity for help make everything go faster.

Gang, please return this thread to discussion of how hit points are calculated and whether you want to home rule some new mechanism. But I don't want to have this become an ideological discussion about things beyond calculation of hit points. So knock it off or I shut it down. 

On 6/27/2019 at 11:14 AM, Mugen said:

Strike Ranks and localized Hit Points are something I don't want to use anymore.

Which is perfectly valid opinion. But it is worth point out that plenty of people like Strike Ranks and localised Hit Points (like myself and the other designers). They have been a part of every iteration of Chaosium RQ and there has never been any serious thought to getting rid of them.

1 minute ago, Jeff said:

Legend is its own thing and not under license from Chaosium or Moon Design Publications. Mongoose was perfectly entitled to take their work, remove from it those elements that were derived from RuneQuest or Glorantha and give it its own name, and then do with it as they see fit. Legend is not RuneQuest or BRP or Call of Cthulhu, and nor does it purport to be.

If Mongoose wants to do a OGL of their original work, that is not our issue or concern. My post is only to remind folk that the MRQ OGL has long since expired and not to rely on it. 

I shouldn't need to add that if you want to use Legend for a project, you need to make sure that your project does not otherwise violate someone else's IP. But given the amount of wilful ignorance out there nowadays, I think it is probably prudent to remind folk of that as well.

Legend is its own thing and not under license from Chaosium or Moon Design Publications. Mongoose was perfectly entitled to take their work, remove from it those elements that were derived from RuneQuest or Glorantha and give it its own name, and then do with it as they see fit. Legend is not RuneQuest or BRP or Call of Cthulhu, and nor does it purport to be.

If Mongoose wants to do a OGL of their original work, that is not our issue or concern. My post is only to remind folk that the MRQ OGL has long since expired and not to rely on it. 

I don't collect souls, but do accept US dollars or Euros.

To the extent someone has made an original work that is not legally derivative of Chaosium's IP, of course they have the right to do with it as they will, including issue a perpetual OGL. That's the WotC OGL - WotC owned D&D outright and could do with it what they wanted, including issue perpetual third party licenses. However, Mongoose's license for RuneQuest was limited in duration. You can't license to others more than you actually have. So when their RuneQuest license was terminated, any licenses they issued under that license died with it.

9 hours ago, Bill the barbarian said:

Jeff, could you give us insight as to how that decision got made, no attacks just curious minds and all (I must be a Yinkin). It would help to rule decisions i make and better envision the RQ G combat meta-concept. I would like to get as comfortable with this system as I used to be with RQ 3.

That would be why; using Shield and any weapon for attack and parry would not be similar to any weapon attack and parry in the RAW. That is one percentage for both.

Cheers

In playtesting, that approach quickly got clunky and confusing for many players. People had no trouble with the idea of using the 1H Spear skill for attacking and parrying, but viewed using their Shield as a separate thing.  Some people like using their shields to parry with, some people like using their attacking weapon to parry with. 

Getting rid of separate attack/parry skills solved a BIG problem in RQ2/3 where folk had an absurd imbalance in those skills (it also effectively DOUBLES the number of weapon skills characters have). I'd rather have players play around with more minor, character-defining skills like various Lores or Communication skills than double the number of weapon skills. It also added additional complexity to character generation, etc. 

2 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

That's how the Loz/Nash system works (MRQ2, RQ6, Mythras), not sure about MRQ1.

We considered that and rejected it. You are welcome to home rule that in your game, but that's not how it is presented in RQ.

7 hours ago, Mugen said:

I agree, and I'm always bothered by rpg rules where the melee skill only adds to attack rolls, such as it was the case in first edition of "new World of Darkness", or in most D&D editions.

But still, my feeling is that for characters that use shields as their main defensive tool, it's the shield's parry chance that should benefit from experience or training, not the main weapon.

I agree. 

6 minutes ago, g33k said:

Sorry, Jeff, but the essence of the Other WomanGame is that you're cheating on your own.  Nothing from Chaosium counts.

 

Just be glad you wound up with Tekumel!

 

 

Imagine if it had been D&D... I've heard she's been with virtually everyone...

 

I dated her in high school. About the same time Prince released Purple Rain.

2 hours ago, g33k said:

Jeff, Jeff, Jeff... <sigh>

That's really just an egregiously kinky reading of the language.

 

"Mistress" here is clearly the Other WomanGame.  You'd use it when you were referring to your GM for your Tekumel campaign.

 

I'm clearly a follower of the Tripartite Woman - RuneQuest, Call of Cthulhu, and Pendragon. The Other Game must be Nephilim. Or Seven Seas. 

1 minute ago, qws2 said:

I'm somewhat tired of waiting for GGoG... Of course, I'll wait again next year or next-next year. Already waited over 5 years.

But if I had GGoG preview copy,  I woud have waited more happily. Has anyone a extra copy and sell me it?

An old version was sold last year at GenCon. It was MUCH smaller than the current version, and a lot has been revised even in the material that was included.

Maybe - just maybe - I can be persuaded to sell a few of the current two-volume manuscript at GenCon, but there's need to be significant interest.

Gods and Goddesses will take a while because it has a LOT of art, and it gets updated as I realise additional information is needed to support scenarios, etc. And of course the art. You think RQG looked good? 

This is just a reminder to folk out there that there is not an Open Game License for BRP, RQ, or CoC. 

Q: Does Call of Cthulhu, RuneQuest, Magic World, the Basic Roleplaying system, Pendragon, or 7th Sea come under the provisions of an Open Game License (OGL)?

A: No.

Q: Is there a System Reference Document (SRD) for Call of Cthulhu, RuneQuest, Magic World, the Basic Roleplaying system, Pendragon, or 7th Sea?

A: No.

Q: Can I rely on the Mongoose RQ SRD to publish material?

A: No. Mongoose’s license for RuneQuest was terminated in April 2011. At that point, Mongoose lost all rights to continue using the RuneQuest trademark, or to create and publish material derivative from the previous copywritten material, or to issue any sublicenses based on that agreement. Since Mongoose no longer had any rights to RuneQuest, it has no ability to issue a third-party license to that material (which is all an OGL is). 

For more information, see https://www.chaosium.com/fan-use-and-licensing-q-a/

Next up is the Smoking Ruins, then the Pegasus Plateau, and then the Starter Set. The RuneQuest Campaign Book and the Gods and Goddesses of Glorantha - those are my special projects and will be done when I feel they are done. Both contain tons of new material and help move the game forward into new territory - but as a result, they are far more complex than campaign and scenario books.

My personal experience comes from the martial arts as well, and at my temple at least, when you are practicising forms you don't practice attack OR parry as discrete skills, you perform it all together. You can certainly do what makes more sense to you, but as far as I am concerned, the mechanics are resolved.

There is no Free Will Rune, as that is not something inherent in the cosmos. The gods gave up their freedom of action as part of the Great Compromise between them - the dead gods and the living gods. That enabled the great web to contain Chaos and let Arachne Solara devour the Devil and give birth to Time.

Mortals are not bound by the Great Compromise, although to wield the power of the gods they do devote themselves to their service, allowing the gods to act through mortals.

5 hours ago, soltakss said:

The way I see it is that Elmal is Yelmalio as worshipped by the Orlanthi and Yelmalio is Yelmalio as worshipped by the Solars.

Orlanth is friendly to Elmal, as he was the Yelmalio who stayed behind and helped the people of Orlanth, but is neutral to Yelmalio as he was the Yelmalio who left the people of Orlanth.

Actually, ANTIRIUS is Yelmalio as worshiped by the Solars. The Bright God is merely a placeholder for the absent Yelm. 

Yelmalio is neutral. In-between. Neither Solar nor Orlanthi. A bit of both and neither at the same time.

The old conflict between Elmal partisans and Yelmalio partisans reappears!

Simple way of looking at this - the Elmal (sub)cult is associated with Orlanth, the Yelmalio cult is neutral. The gods fought in the Gods War, but also cooperated together in the Gods War. Orlanth has few non-Chaotic cults he cannot cooperate with on at least a neutral basis - he is the King of the Gods after all. He's hostile to the Seven Mothers, but not an Enemy, The Red Goddess is an Enemy as are all Chaotic cults.

8 hours ago, Byll said:

I read Xenophon's Anabasis in translation on the train to/from college many years ago. I wonder where that paperback is in the book cases now? Hah, top of the stairs, maybe I should dip into it again...

Supposedly it was Kirk's bedtime reading on the USS Enterprise; it was the first time I recall hearing anything about the Kurds.

I read the Anabasis and Diaz's Conquest of New Spain while doing a 160 km kayak trip in the Canadian Rockies with my brother. Nothing gives you more respect for the hardship those folk went through than reading about it after having done a 6km portage in the wilderness.