SDLeary

I would head over to the Design Mechanism forum site and ask this again, or cross post in the Runequest forum here (Loz is there more than here). IIRC, its scheduled to be reworked for RQ6. SDLeary

Also available in the downloads section here. Arc Dream did say to share it! SDLeary

Flintnail Dwarves perhaps? SDLeary

I use something like this too. I have changed the name to Soul though, at least for fantasy. It also makes spell fumbles fun! SDLeary

Magic World, using the Sentient creatures rules is a hit that I've heard about. SDLeary

In this case, the NPC should still win. A critical is always triumphant. If the PC succeeds, AND the NPC succeeds, but rolls lower than the PC, the NPC has a partial success and would "know something is up". That is when I would say that the PC gets what they want, but the NPC then cuts them off, or is at least pissed with them and says that they cut them off. WRT to skills over 100%, just introduce a bump system (Masteries from HQ). Skills reset, start over from 1 and advance from there. The player may use the bump to bump in either direction, but cannot bump a special to a critical (at least in my version), or a critical to a special if they do not want to necessarily kill their opponent. SDLeary

You forgot the negative modifier... SIZ!! This is pretty much along my line of thought for categories and their use. SDLeary

I like it this way too by default. I don't mind more powerful healing magic, but it does depend on the setting that I'm using. The more heroic, the more I like healing to be instantaneous. Though to be fair I've always thought Heal Wound and Heal Body to be something of a copout. These I prefer at rituals, taking HitPoint damage in minutes or perhaps even hours. On the flip side though, I would say that these would be instantaneous during a HeroQuest. SDLeary

Take a look at the Delta Green QuickStart that I uploaded: Delta Green: Need to Know. They have adopted something like this. SDLeary

Eldarad wasn't "bad". It certainly wasn't up to normal Chaosium standards, but was a hell of a lot better than much of the drek that was coming out for other systems at the time. SDLeary

Missing the roll, I assume means that the DI fails, no POW lost, but what about the remaining RP? Also, what if the roll equals POW + RP; action occurs but the character doesn't make it? SDLeary

Have you tried an opposed roll system, such as the one in Pendragon? Each character can initiate a combat action each round. This combat action encompasses all attack and defense. Winner (highest roll under skill) gets to damage opponent. If opponent is partial winner (under skill but under winners roll), they get their parrying weapon in the way to reduce the damage they take; if they fail their roll they take the full damage. Wash, rinse, repeat when the opponents turn comes. The down side to this is that Criticals (and Specials if you use them) become more difficult, especially if you use 5% Crits. I simply say Crits are on roll of skill only (1%), and sometimes I use specials based on rolls of pairs. SDLeary

I think I'm really liking the way they have tweaked Sanity. Not quite the way I've been playing with it, but nice to see some of the UA categories and hardening in there! SDLeary

I have just uploaded ArcDream's new quick-start release Delta Green: Need to Know. They have made this available to all, not just the kickstart backers. Based on my quick run thru, this might become my new favorite core version of the BRP rules (or BRP-ish). Sorry @Jason Durall! SDLeary

I'd actually go with a modified RQ2 formula. General HP is equal to SIZ. +1 point for STR between 13 and 16, +2 for 17 to 20, etc. I would only use POW if running a heroic game (and then we should probably be using PenDragon Pass rather than RQ anyway). This means that your Giant should have about 61 hit points depending on exact STR. About right I think; Giants and large beasties should be hard to kill. I would still use CON for resistance to potency, but I would require perhaps a dosage based on... SIZ, mass, HP?? Purchasing or manufacturing that much extra could be prohibitive. SDLeary

Yeah, I was pulling off the top of my head. SDLeary

Animal, or I guess in Glorantha it would be Beast. SDLeary

History guy must resist!!! SDLeary

How are you handling armor variability by location? Just not worrying about it, or are you using die based variable armor absorption? SDLeary

IIRC, something like this was done in Mythic Iceland. I'll have to take a look tomorrow. SDLeary

Interesting. Makes me wonder why this kind of thing didn't creep into our games. SDLeary

This is not something that was done in our games. If we needed to use the Divine Magic, and we were initiates, we would. Especially if it wa going to save our bacon. In fact, I think we only had one higher level cultist in our group, a Sword IIRC. ?? I don't have a copy of Griffin Island any more, but I do have a copy of Griffin Mountain, and a copy of Dorastor. WRT Dorastor, I would assume that it would have more to do with Chaos or Illumination, but I could be wrong. Do you recall which NPCs (in either)so I can look it up? Now on to something else. Based on the tone that this last post had, it appears that I have made you mad. Please understand that this is not my intent, and I'm sorry if that is what has happened. YRQWV SDLeary

I can live with or without it game wise, but I actually liked the POW economy. It made it seem that when you were pledging yourself to a god that you were giving more of "yourself" than simple magic points that would regenerate after a few hours, an actual piece of the characters soul if you will. The same is true for praying for divine magic, bindings, and enchantments. These are all very powerful miracles and magics that should cost more. Either that or perhaps Magic Points should only regenerate at the rate of one per day rather than all every 24 hrs. For me, treating with gods, binding otherworld beings, and imbuing an item with a long term magical effect just feels like it should cost more. Are there down sides? Yup, and there should be. I disagree here. I think the value of POW actually reinforces it. You don't spend it lightly, you don't diminish your soul lightly. You have played with much different crowds than I have. I would not have, nor would any of the GMs I've played with, allowed any such behavior. Certainly not within Glorantha where it would seem to me to be a violation of the Compromise. Now after the death of a character could a Hero Cult start up? That I'd be ok with. I remember the listserv. I also remember that much of what was on there was conceptual in nature. What-if scenarios. I'd never heard that any of it was done in actual scenarios. You mean an abstract currency that is really not part of the character or their connection to the world or the gods they worship? Hero Points already exist as a game mechanic in many BRP games, to allow for re-rolls of dice, and to mitigate death of characters when it doesn't serve the story line. Entrenching it deeper into the game for in-scenario character benefits as you describe certainly doesn't seem to be in keeping with RQ. But as you have said, YRQWV. SDLeary

I don't think your trying to tell everyone that they are crazy. And I can understand being sad as well; as stated I was hoping that they would use MW as the baseline after the work that had gone into that project. I'm just not sure, based on what they have stated so far, that its quite as bad as you think it is. They switched the baseline, and when they did so they stated (admittedly in various forums) that they were going to pick up ideas from here and there, including Pendragon, RQ6, and other iterations of Chaosium and presumably non-Chaosium games. Is Will's video series live action, or does he edit? I can't imagine that someone unfamiliar with a system would not have problems negotiating it, at least thru the first session or two, Special Effects or no. I could be wrong though. GW (GDW was Traveller). Yes, they were basically the licensee in the UK (and Europe?) for RQs 2 and 3. And the examples I gave were for d100 games that while not licensees of RQ, are either direct descendants of games that were (mRQ1 -> mRQ2 -> Legend), or those that are in some way based upon the mRQ SRD that is available in the downloads section. I will have to take your word on this as I am unfamiliar with Savage Worlds, though I did see a ton of stuff on the shelf at my FLGS a couple of years ago. Sounds like the edition you are referring to is similar in form to FATE Core. Honestly, I'm not sure. As they have stated that they are going to essentially weave it into the rules so that the game reflects the world; or at least thats how I have interpreted what they have said. More than what was in RQ2, probably about the amount thats in the HQ:G rules. Bestiary size of course would depend on introductory scope: Sartar; Pavis; Something Else? If its Something Else, then more would probably be needed as not much would be out there. I would be more worried about having to strip so much out of RQ6 and then add the changes to customize it for Glorantha, that it fundamentally ceases to be RQ6. Much of what makes RQ6 great is the effort that Pete and Loz put into it to make it a complete setting free game. Im not trying to diminish it, I've just never really experienced it to the degree you seem to be implying. I have often used Malleus Monstrorum to pull out baddies at a moments notice and not really run into issues. Most of my games though do equate to Street Level, so mayhem and injury was expected. And TDM's RQ6 will remain, albeit under a new name. They aren't gutting the combat system. They are starting with a different baseline and modifying it from there. I don't think your stirring the pot, I'm just not seeing the level of gloom that you appear to be. I did at the beginning of all of this, but Chaosium has done a somewhat decent job so far of mitigating my fears. Do I think that this is the ideal solution? No, but its better than the way it appeared this last summer. SDLeary