SDLeary

Not so much. You don't want to lower your pike into the back of your comrade in front of you; also if pikes in the rear ranks are lowered, you diminish the protection they provide from missile fire (and remember only front ranks might have medium to heavy armor). Which means dropping the pike, using a secondary weapon, closing (breaking formation) and attacking the elemental. Depending, it has the possibility to disrupt the formation. At the very least, those in front will wonder what's going on, and slow down a bit, or look back and possibly panic. SDLeary

If you played in the game of one of us Ol' Timers, and were seriously impressed, and wanted to get a set of the rules so you could run it for your crew, how would you go about doing it if you didn't have $100+ to blow on a falling apart book on eBay? SDLeary

This would really be all that was needed, though printed is always better. And, Chaosium owns the text, they own the Trademark. The only thing that might prove troublesome would be finding artists and getting them to agree. SDLeary

I'll be honest. From my point of view, Chaosium's production standards are way over the top for game books. It's as if they are producing for collectors and not for players. But making EVERY book a coffee table edition, you increase the price and fewer people can afford it. Initially, this may draw in people that wouldn't have looked at your stuff before, but once that bump is over, you will probably sell to fewer and fewer over the long haul. Now don't get me wrong, for prestige items like the Guide and for Special Editions I can understand it and encourage it. And in the other direction AH's standards, such as... gah... Elder Secrets and others, they really needed more. <snip> Anyway... rant for another time and thread. SDLeary

I remember. Whenever the question is brought up though, the general bent feels like "but why, we have this shiny new Runequest". In don't like it, but I do understand it. Yes, I get that impression too. SDLeary

Because you don't have access? If you want to start RQ3 these days, the buy-in is fairly steep. The "monograph" editions mitigated that, though they did lack the Gloranthan information from the fifth book. I wholeheartedly agree. But not all GMs have the ability, or time, to collate and produce a coherent pamphlet that is detailed enough for their players. We do, because... well we are... different! 😉 I have to give them credit too. It is certainly nice to see what has come out of their effort. SDLeary

And... Time for out semiannual bump! SDLeary

Yes, but people that want to scratch that RQ3 itch have to do a lot of work to do with the BGB, mainly because Stormbringer was used as the core. When you start piecing things together, they don't really fit well, as Barak points out. Its much easier to convey to a player what rules are, if you hand them in a handy volume they can browse though when creating their characters, rather than having them look through a tool book with option boxes stuffed here and there. Jason did an excellent job putting things together, but Chaosium should have planned for a second edition that ironed things out a bit more, and made those options fit together a bit easier, either by tweaking them, or by providing more guidance for integration. As for now, now that Chaosium doesn't support the BGB, I'd like to suggest that they simply bring a classic edition of RQ3 back, the way they did RQ2. They won't, but a guy can dream. SDLeary

What are you thinking of that would make shape relevant? SDLeary

It's cumbersome, but it can work if the game provides a large pool of skill points, and if players are given enough time to craft their character. SDLeary

Somewhat. In Ringworld, there was no category bonus. The category values represented the highest a skill could progress (the Root Maximum) before having to declare a Branch skill. Melee weapons (Archaic Melee Weapons) fell under Agility, and the Root Maximum for that category was STR + DEX. So Joe (STR 12, DEX 13) could train in Archaic Melee Weapons until he reached 25%. At that point, he would have to declare a specialty in order to keep advancing. The specialties were Swords, Axes, Maces, and so on, so with this example it wouldn't necessarily get too far into the weeds. But you can imagine how cumbersome this approach would be in a fantasy game where we are debating the differences of sword length, blade curvature and the direction thereof, and so on. 🙂 SDLeary

Agreed. Perhaps the "skill" is Close Combat (specialization), where the specialization is one of the weapon categories. Similar categories are at a malus (though never less than 1/2 skill), dissimilar categories at 1/2 skill? This, at least, would encapsulate basic hand-to-hand concepts into a single skill that would carry over to other weapons. And if you wanted to know another weapon category, you could always learn a new specialization starting at half Close Combat skill. SDLeary

Kind of... While you are somewhat correct about Rapiers (and their descendants), straight single and double edged 1h swords, of varying lengths, are all used much the same way. They tend to be cut and thrust. There is some variation to this because of local/regional design of blades (some pointy points, some rounded points), but the basic fighting style is the same. Even Bronze Age rapiers can be used in this way. We think shortswords are different, because of the Romans and the way their legionaries employed them. They intentionally trained to use it primarily as a thrusting weapon. This was thought unusual enough that this is commented on in primary sources, and how difficult it was to accomplish this; but Livy (Macedonian Wars) also comments about how Macedonian soldiers were horrified at the dismemberment of bodies caused by this sword. We don't hear (to my knowledge) about Greek soldiers using the Xiphos in the same way (primarily thrust). You don't want things to be too divided though. I would keep 1h sword for most, and only call out those that might be outliers, such as the falx, by giving them low base chance. I would even leave rapiers in this category unless you are thinking of them in the later European context. Hammer and Axe should probably be in the same category of "1h hafted". Single handed maces should be placed in a "club" category, though given a lower base skill chance. SDLeary

Another method, and one which PCs could employ if faced by such, is terrain. Pike formations do NOT like rocky or soft terrain. SDLeary

My guess is Chaosium updating the copyright info on the title page. I would be very happy to be wrong though. SDLeary EDIT: There may be something more going on, but at first blush the changes I see are a change in Chaosium's book number (now 2026 rather than 2020), and the ISBN has changed.

How about... a person with a shield, gets the extra defense instance without a modifier; while a person dual wielding weapons gives a defensive penalty to the person they are facing? SDLeary EDIT: upon reflection this could work, but would work better with combined rolls, as in Pendragon.

Also excludes Delta Green, and all its progeny. SDLeary

And it looks SOOOOO purdy! Very very easy to read, even on a screen! @lawrence.whitaker (I keep wanting to type Loz), what are we looking at here? This doesn't quite look like Warnock 10/12... but its really really easy on the eyes! SDLeary

Ahhh, nice! Brings back fond memories of some of the RQ utilities on the old Soda archives! macOS has a BSD userland. Think there could be any issues installed there? SDLeary

Also... organization is a bit different. Initiate and Shaman, as stated on the tin, though Shaman cannot later become Chieftains. Acolyte, priests who are not Chieftans. Chieftain, top of the heap. Cult Priest and leader of the social group in one. SDLeary

They descended from turtles: Non-cannon, but fun. I don't remember it being said that they could change into turtles, but they did ride them, and IIRC, they reincarnated into turtles. SDLeary

Hmmm, not sure. The first one, I think, was used on an OpenQuest publication. @Newt ? I do believe that I read somewhere that Mongoose was reworking Legend though, so its certainly possible. SDLeary P.S.: the first is similar to the OpenQuest cover in 2010, though on it there was a dwarf instead of the closest human, and a duck.

If so, I'd consider Theyalan languages a versions of "greek" that was really really ancient. Probably based more on Minoan. More a language from the Fertile Crescent... so more like Mesopotamian, or Assyrian It might have some clicks and clacks, but I think its much more than that. Deep notes and vibrations from the back of the throat or gut. Notes that project out to somewhat fit in with Darksense, which seems to be a form of echolocation. Tarshite is a Theyalan language, so see above. Just my 4¢ (damned inflation) SDLeary

Or, one could simply adjust the Armor table (Table 6.1, p.139). Change the "Heavy Load" heading to "Load". The load for Clothing and Heavy Clothing stays at N. Padded and Leather Armor becomes L(ight), and Hard Leather and above remains H(eavy). At the end of a fight, the GM can require the PKs to roll CON to see if they have "tired". The multiple of the roll would be based on how encumbered the PKs were. Perhaps N could be CONx5, L could be CONx4, and H could be CONx3. You could have, say, a penalty of -2 Movement. And, you could have it so that this is cumulative, should the PKs find themselves in several small combats, or a running battle. As far as the Movement Bonus for those unencumbered, I'd say leave it. Not so much for those that want to Buckle Swashes, but for those instances when rowdy villagers or townsfolk decide they have no other option. SDLeary

I'm not sure having the weight of a shield would be something looked fondly upon by Humakt. "Get used to it and stop whining, or just damn well use your sword more!" SDLeary