Jason D

8 hours ago, Mankcam said:

Yes, fair enough, it would just be chaos heh heh

Or we'd end up renaming the game Runey McRuneface. 

3 hours ago, David Scott said:

@Jason Durall's design notes are excellent and leads us through the complex array of historical design and current thinking. I look forward to the complete cover as currently this has the feeling of watching someone choosing a hat to wear. You'd look better in that old hat, new hat, a different hat, a hat my mother had, a different material, it looks like this hat, you don't want a hat you want a scarf, my hat is nicer than your hat, etc. The complete outfit is what I want (at some point). It will undoubtedly be eye catching, have a name badge identifying the authors and a Chaosium brooch and most will buy it anyway even if it had a unicorn hat.

 

(apologies for not using the new logo, it didn't fit in with my unicorn theme and I couldn't find a pink Chaosium logo)

Who showed you that?!?

1 minute ago, goal:dilmun said:

I might have been a bit too harsh in my wording. The final one works ok. It's just not great. Anyway, I really think it would look better with just a solid fill color and a darker outline, like the CoC logo. If the plan is to go with clean and functional, that's a style that would sell that idea a lot better. But I'm not a designer, so I might be wrong.

Here's the thing. The RuneQuest logo needs to be readable on the spine of the book. Ideally, at a distance. 

The one we didn't use (with the ornate scrollwork at top and bottom) is too thick vertically for easy placement. So you have to remove the runes and the red designwork to make it fit. At that point, it's another Celtic uncial title, which we were not thrilled with. 

3 hours ago, SDLeary said:

Um... Really?

I like the layout, the color works on a black background. And should work on a book cover if it is a black cover. Over a piece of artwork without a background (going from tradition here) not so much.

And the main title font... you need a new font.

SDLeary

We have differently colored variants of it, for all cover treatments. 

Just now, Mankcam said:

A poll may be good for something like this...😁

I would honestly rather not see one. 

Thanks all for your feedback. As I understand things, the corrected proof has been submitted for printing at this point. I'll have to check with Rick when he's back from GAMA to confirm, though. We made as many corrections as we were able in the time we had, though some suggestions were not implemented for various reasons.  

On 3/10/2018 at 7:08 PM, kalidor said:

How much longer to get RQG in PDF?

We're working daily on it. I hate to give a date only to be wrong, but layout is roaring. 

This is a very nice-looking book, and certain chapters such as adventurer generation and combat take a lot of work, with all of the tables. 

On 3/10/2018 at 9:31 PM, g33k said:

The lack of an announcement indicates that certain "imponderables" remain, issues whose resolution they cannot reliably time.  The are, after all, the Chaosium not the Orderium...  ;-)

As noted above, giving a specific date is a prescription to be wrong. But "not that much longer" is a safe estimation. 

On 3/11/2018 at 3:35 PM, styopa said:

I'd guess they were struggling mightily to get it out the door in time for Gen Con but as g33k observed there are perhaps some unanticipated roadblocks.  My understanding is that the rules are done, and the last step they were in was layout which involves commissioning art...which can always be a tricky process, as artists have a famous disregard for mundanities like schedules and deadlines.

Art is 99% done. I think we're waiting for an adjustment to a map and a sidebar header. To be honest, the winter convention season hit us hard, and there was this other sourcebook we squeezed into the schedule before RuneQuest... 

On 3/11/2018 at 11:54 PM, g33k said:

I believe the FreeRPGday & Gen-Con demo-feedback (plus feedback from the GenCon "Draft-Complete" rules they sold @ the 'Con) got them to revise their "complete" draft; I don't know if that called for the new stuff to get another pass through playtesting or not.  This revision was, I suppose, another Happening.

Not so much, as it happens. The clarifications that came up with the FRPG Day Quickstart had already been addressed in the manuscript. We got some useful feedback from the ashcan version, but ultimately we weren't releasing and waiting... editing and revisions were ongoing, and will probably be ongoing (but tapering) until we send in the last print proof signoff. 

13 hours ago, smiorgan said:

I may be completely wrong and I do not presume to know how Chaosium are thinking , but if I were Chaosium I would not announce RQG until 13G has been out in print for a week or two. My basic reasoning would be that each Gloranthan rpg deserves its moment in the spotlight.

But again, I might be completely wrong.

While it's probably good form to not steal one game's thunder with an announcement about a second with an overlapping fan base, but to be clear, we're going to announce the  RuneQuest .pdf's availability as soon as it's possible.  

4 hours ago, Manu said:

• How do we determine the spiritual damage. We have an example from the PC, but no rules.
• I also have some question about parrying with weapon and shield. If the shield parry is successful against and special attack, the shield receive the special damage. But what if critical attack? Is the rule the same for parrying with a weapon? I would say yes and the shield is just better because it can parry missiles
• And concerning the shield vs missile, it is not clear (to me at least) :when it is said that a small shield protects only the shield arm, does it mean that a successful parry is useful only if the hit location is the shield arm?

In answer to your questions: 

• Spirit combat damage is based on POW+CHA:
  • 2-12 = 1D3
  • 13-24 = 1D6
  • 25-32 = 1D6+1
  • 33-40 = 1D6+3
  • 41-56 = 2D6+3
  • Assistant shamans begin with +1 spirit combat damage, and more experienced shamans better bonuses. 
• For a critical attack vs. a parry, roll the special damage and apply the damage directly to the parrying shield/item, and any excess goes to the defender, bypassing armor protection. 
• A successful shield parry always protects the defender against an missile weapon attack (unless the weapon attack bypasses the shield's hit points, as above). If desired, an adventurer can use a shield up to ward off missile fire without needing to parry. The shield will automatically protect the hit locations it normally protects... a small shield covers shield arm only, a medium shield covers shield arm and another hit location (player choice), and a large shield protects the shield arm and two other hit locations (player's choice). No parry roll is required... any hits to those locations hit the shield instead. 

18 hours ago, SDLeary said:

They didn't respond specifically to the runes issue, but did say that they were going to both have an artsy character sheet, and a B&W one. My guess is that what we are looking at is probably preliminary, and will probably go through final tweaks.

SDLeary

Correct. 

You're looking at the un-modified initial version of the color sheet.

In fact, that picture is of the first version, and many small tweaks have already been made. Many more will be made, including intensity balancing for areas where the image interacts with text. 

9 hours ago, Psychman27 said:

Modiphius did it well with their Conan rpg, the had a full art sheet, but alongside that also had the same sheet black-and-white, and a sheet with just the structure and mechanical content but no art. All of which were in form-fillable pdf so that the sheet could be continually updated and saved between sessions. 

As it happens, I work very closely with the Conan line manager, so I'll be paying close attention to the lessons he learned on that line. 

Just for a trip down Memory Lane, during the development of the big gold book I asked about changing the name to "The Chaos Engine", "The Chaosium Engine", or "The Chaos System", but no one went for it. 

Dustin also asked me if I'd be up for the equivalent of an Even More Basic Roleplaying book, but we never could get the stars to align for that. 

Just to be clear, we're still collecting feedback and reading these forums carefully. Part of the purpose of the Gen Con preview edition was specifically to get the rules outside the Chaosium biosphere and to external player groups. 

Until the print proof is authorized, it's not final. We want it to get there soon and hold off on any last-minute changes, but they happen. 

On 9/3/2017 at 10:50 AM, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

Thanks Jason. What happens if a character is forced to chose parry on their attack SR, do they still have an opportunity to attack on the following strike rank? 

I don't have the book in front of me, but IIRC, you can parry and attack in the same strike rank, so there'd be no need to delay your attack. 

On 6/28/2017 at 11:25 AM, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

Wonder if @Jason Durall could confirm whether that is the design intent, to allow characters to delay their attack to occur on a later SR of their choosing in the melee round? Or does the abstract nature of SR's not allow for this? 

It is the design intent, and you can. Just not so long that you go past the end of the round. 

On 6/27/2017 at 0:46 PM, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

@Jason Durall Can characters/NPC's delay an action in melee to occur on a later strike rank of their choosing?

Yes. 

Noted, thanks! 

17 hours ago, Joerg said:

Medieval Germany - which period? Karolingian Germany/France would be a good companion for early Viking time, Ottonic Germany has its charms, the rise and fall of the Hanseatic League would be my favourite (also because you get to travel to other fun places when not being mired in German affairs).

I guess there ought to be some know-how among German players of RQ or other BRP systems.

Jeff already researched 30-year-War Germany for the Westfalian Peace freeform, so one could build onto that material.

As mentioned on the submission guidelines, the Ottonic period specifically. 

17 hours ago, g33k said:

Okay, now we're talking!!!  A peek into the pipeline (noting for all the fanboiz&grrlz that some of these are preliminary/speculative & may fail-to-launch for reasons outside Chaosium control) ...

• Iceland Companion... I recall hearing mention before, but had forgotten; good to have the reminder!
• Collected-adventure book (for Iceland, from context?)
• Suggestion of a separate "Skraeling" book (any chance of this leading to an entire "Mythic Americas" setting (vs. a Norse-centric "skraeling" POV)?
• something Rus "iirc"
• "a much-later era book contents TBR" (a year-ish ago, Chaosium was hinting at a "Noir Detective" (non-Mythos) book... this it?)
• Wish-listing:  Medieval Germany; Constantinople; Penaissance Prague; Japan...

Thanks for this; it's everything I could have wished you to tell us, and more than I expected!

In answer to your questions... 

Skraeling/Wine-land book - when reviewing Pedro's Mythic Iceland manuscript, it was apparent that the material about skraelings and Slab-land, Forest-land, and Wine-land was greatly removed from the core game experience of being heroes in mythic Iceland. Additionally, it really calls for more, such as a campaign about survival, settlement-building, and exploration, which is also outside the core game experience of being heroes in mythic Iceland. So we'd like to give it room to breathe, as a campaign sourcebook of its own. 

Much-later era book - no, this isn't the noir book. After going back and forth over the tone and "soul" of that book, we and the author decided it wasn't the right project. He pitched us another sourcebook he's passionate about, and this is it. 

Thanks for your interest! 

23 hours ago, MatteoN said:

Hi all!

Any chance of a version of Mark Galeotti's outstanding HeroQuest-based Mythic Russia for the RuneQuest Fantasy Earth line?

 

As much as I would love to see it, I'd be highly surprised if Mark would take the time out of his busy schedule to work on such a project, and it could not be a simple conversion.  

On 8/24/2017 at 7:02 PM, g33k said:

Danke!

Huh...  I don't think I had previously noted this product-identity.

Heya!  Just gonna drop the teaser and walk away?  C'mon, man!  Give us a topic or two, at least !!!   

We've talked about RQ Fantasy Earth before. The RQ3 rules discussed it, and we've been quite explicit about what we'd like to see for the line on our website. https://www.chaosium.com/roleplaying-game-submissions/ 

Specifically, this: 

Quote

 

RuneQuest Fantasy Earth

We are also looking for supplements set in RuneQuest Fantasy Earth. These use the rules template presented in the new RuneQuest Mythic Iceland. These might be additional adventures set in the North Sea of the 9th or 10th centuries AD, using Icelandic Adventurers along the lines of Egil’s Saga or the Viking Romances. 

We are also looking for new settings for RuneQuest Fantasy Earth, such as Anglo-Saxon England, Constantinople under the Macedonian Dynasty, the Holy Roman Empire during the Ottonians, Abbasid Baghdad, Heian period Japan, the China of Di Renjie, etc. All RuneQuest Fantasy Earth settings should be set in a specific historical period and culture. Don't try to present everything - focus on a specific city or region. Be historically accurate without being pedantic.

A new setting book will need to include a short self-contained rules section that includes creating characters in that setting, the RQ game mechanics and combat system, magic for that setting (which should not be based on Rune spells or sorcery - the Gloranthan Runes are not present in fantasy Earth!).

 

All going according to plan, Pedro will be following Mythic Iceland up with a companion book. We'd like to do an adventure book. I've suggested that we remove the Skraeling/North America material from Mythic Iceland and flesh it out to be its own campaign. IIRC there's something about the Rus in the works. 

We're close to signing a contract for a longtime Chaosium contributor to do a a much later-era book, contents to be revealed. 

On other fronts, we'd LOVE to see a book about medieval Germany. I'd love to see a book about Constantinople, or about 16th century Prague and King Rudolf II's obsession with alchemy. A Japan book would be most welcome. 

On 4/16/2017 at 6:17 AM, g33k said:

BRP continues; RQG is the Glorantha-specific iteration of those rules; Mythic Iceland is another.  Expect more than just those.

But, since this *IS* the Mythic Iceland thread:  *nudge*  Any further word?  

We're quite excited about the RuneQuest Fantasy Earth line, which already has several products in development. 

I'll readily cop to being the bottleneck here... all focus was towards getting the core rules for the new RQ lined up for Pedro to use as the base. When he started the revision last year, the core rules were not locked down, and some things were still "soft". As is now planned, Mythic Iceland will be fully compatible with RQG, and will be the first product in the Fantasy Earth line. Many more will follow. 

Getting that squared away required me to go through his manuscript meticulously and point out discrepancies between his treatment of the BRP rules and the RQ ones, and make some careful decisions about what needed to change.

Now, Pedro now has a full blueprint of what we need his manuscript to become, and a copy of the RQG rules for adaptation. Jeff had a sit-down with him at Gen Con to discuss things, and we'll do a face-to-face status check at The Kraken, in October. 

Jeff and I have clarified this in the Bestiary manuscript, and in the writeups for those characters with elementals. 

• It's easier for earth elementals to shove their own mass around, such as an earth elemental making a big pit. It's basically just telling a bunch of earth "get out of the way". 
• It's harder for earth elementals to do something as tricky as engulfing a moving being and bringing them down to waist-high and immobilize them. 

We've also adjusted the sizes of earth elementals to be more in line with others, so that a small earth elemental is about 1 cubic meter in size, which coincidentally, is just about waist-high. 

6 hours ago, GamingGlen said:

I'll wait until I see the entire rules before I get excited about them.

I hope they go with RQ3+ method instead of RQ2 method of figuring out the characteristics' adjustment to skills, whether by category or direct.  I dislike the large steps from RQ2, you either have a 13, 17, or 21; nothing in between matters.  Also, this is a percentile system, why the +5 jumps in RQ2, including the gains from training?  That makes the system more like a glorified D20 system.  We don't even know if they will have skills grouped by category, although they do hint at it with some of the spell descriptions (i.e., +20% to Perceptions skills).  When I put the QS characters in my spreadsheet, I guessed at the categories, using RQ2 & RQ3 as guide.  I came up with two algorithms, based on RQ2, and based on RQ3 although I used 9 instead of 10 as the base number.  The two systems came with nearly identical numbers for the average person.

Like others, I'll be implementing some house rules with the new game.  I'm not keen on Passions or this new Rune thingamajig from what I've seen so far.

A few quick replies: 

• We're using the RQ2 method of skill category modifiers.
• Training merits a die roll for improvement. 
• I'm not sure how to address "more like a glorified D20 system" when RQ was a significant influence on the design of D&D 3rd edition. 
• Skills are clearly grouped by categories on the quickstart characters. We originally provided the skills category modifiers, but these were confusing to non-RQ players, who didn't know if they would modify the values provided. 

As has been said before, one of the virtues of the BRP system is its modularity. It's quite easy to remove subsystems, houserule things, and add new systems onto it. 

Generally, I tend to view it as: 

1. If your characteristic is bring pitted against its own limits, like pulling yourself up by your hands, use a characteristic roll. This also applies to rolls where there's no clear skill or opposing force, like catching something thrown at you. 

2. If there's an easily-quantified opposing/passive force, use a resistance roll. 

The "carrying someone" used as a double example isn't in the rulebook. 

On 6/22/2017 at 8:35 PM, GamingGlen said:

(should we start new topics in this forum for RQ?  not sure, I'll post my question and an RQ suggestion here)

I thought of something during my running the adventure involving the summoned air elemental about using STR vs STR to get through it's whirlwind.

It came when someone asked what does it take to open the door into the Broken Tower.  There's no mention of what that door is made of, was it locked or barred, or was it open already.

What is the STR of objects to avoid getting blown about?  What if the air elemental is ordered to blow things in a direction?  What are the various wind STRs and compared to a hut, a small tree, a large tree, pushing doors open.  Are these covered in the rules already that just weren't copied into the QS?  

Some quick answers: 

There's no mention of the doors, but the assumption when I wrote the scenario was that they were long gone. The map contradicted that, so when running it I just mentioned they were stone doors, balanced into grooves cut into the ground, so they'd pivot open when pushed in either direction. That made sense considering supplicants are bringing in cattle heads, and also gives Idrima the ability to walk through them without futzing with keys. Why would an immortal stone goddess need a barred door? 

Items would use their SIZ against the elemental's STR. It was deemed too much detail to throw into the already-packed rules section. 

The core rules are very, very comprehensive.