Baron

I can be very specific, as I think you know, Rick. I chose not to be. Shall I document instead? It would take a little bit of time I don't really have. But if you insist, I will. Your call, sir.

Not a published product, fan made. Actually there are two different authors' versions available here. Both very good. The one in chapters was never finished.

Sharing is good. I've also heard rumors (for those who might be relatively new) that a lot of fan-made material was ordered removed from the net by the powers that were at the time. I always cringe when this type of topic comes up in a forum. It almost always reveals a treasure trove that then disappears a week later. A word to the wise: if you want access to the creativity of fans, it might be clever to ask quietly, and not in an open forum.

Duuuucks! Or a Platypus... And a Flintnail Dwarf. Or an Elf from the Rubble. Or a Troll from the Rubble. Seriously, we've now hit all the fun ones, no?

Thanks for your work, Brett. I printed your stuff out and looked it over, but haven't got out the dice to try it out yet. I was going to use it with Rogue Trader, or maybe just as a more general party-based SF game. But any organizing/streamlining you do would be welcome. I'd be using this with young teens, and they won't have access to anything but your doc (and whatever I put together for them).

Many gaming settings have fluff describing the alien or antisocial qualities of races, societies, or religions (or classes, if a part of that game). Some seem to delight in it, and then in providing all the info you need to use them for your player characters. There's a fundamental dichotomy between a writer trying to work up something extremely new and different, and a player looking for something new and fun to use in the group-based games we play. Many cultures and races are described as intolerant of this or that, but when it comes time to roll up characters, hey, off we go. Frex, Praxian nomads are often described as intolerant, violent, ignorant savages who never get off their mounts. But we play them, and in our habitual mixed parties. My point is that it's simple enough to ignore the fluff that would make a PC unplayable. Murderous grudges can be whittled down to Legolas/Gimli snarking, for the sake of playability. Heck, I've seen really obnoxious players taking every chance to antagonize fellow players, with no particular cultural background to justify it, and watched PvP ensue. But obviously, most members of a culture are steeped in their ways, and see their place in life as it has been defined for them. Modify as necessary for the PCs who must, in all cases, be the exception to that rule.

OK thanks, will give it a look. The kid is on spring break and we just got her a new monitor, so this may be just the thing. OTOH, I don't want her to burn out on new rules systems as a result of overload, so we'll have to see.

The idea was to give her something to do on her own. I have more than a dozen T&T solo's. As I say, I even went so far as to create a character of my own, so we had twice the PC power. We died like dogs, repeatedly. So then I dragged out the D&D solo, Thunderdelve Mountain. Again, I created a character to accompany her. We did OK for a while, maybe did half or more of it. But we got to a place where we couldn't advance because we'd missed something it assumed we'd done. In disgust we gave up. So I gave her the do-it-yourself, beginning-DM training module In Search of the Unknown. She read it, but didn't feel like working on it. So she went back to video games and books when I didn't have time to play games with her.

My girl found T&T very frustrating, and is done with it now. Even using various "it's perfectly OK to..." rules, she just got tired of repeatedly dying in every solo. Even if I ran a second character who accompanied her. And she'd played rpgs for years and was already a teen, we're not talking about a little kid. So be warned.

It is hosted here. Also his Codex Xenos, bunch of 'monsters.'

Colin Brett has written up a guide. It may be hosted here.

I did Faerys Tale with my daughter when she was five or so. I ran WEG SW when she got a little older, and she was correcting me when I made a rule mistake, and asking for more complicated systems. We rolled some BRP characters for a Middle Earth campaign, but never got to it because we met some parents + kids at the local game store. They were starting a D&D group, so we joined. I ran a mystery stand-alone scenario and included my non-gaming spouse. I used CoC for the rules. Since then, my daughter has rolled up some Classic Traveller and RQ2 characters. She's almost 14 now. So go ahead and run whatever suits your fancy. As I said, for a BRP setting I was going to do Middle Earth, because she knows it. For RQ I'll use the River of Cradles in a Wind in the Willows atmosphere of newtlings, ducks and river people. For the mystery I went to a generic Mary Poppins-ish era. Got to do Cthilhu soon, though. ;-)

When it first came out, RQ was indeed noted for gritty "realistic" danger. And classless, skill-based advancement by easily-understood percentile scores. And everyone could cast spells. Yes, Glorantha was secondary. But, RQ was also widely known for its crazy creatures: ducks, morokanth, dragonewts, tusk brothers, walktapi, broo, jack o'bears and trollkin. People new to the game STILL ask with disbelief if any of that is "true." Sure, "Cults" became its "Gods Demigods and Heroes," but the histories, myths et al were secondary to how to increase your PC's awesomeness. From RQ2 page 12: "Thus we see that if Rurik had the money, he could put 4000 L towards bringing his STR up to 16... Where would our hero get this money? That's what the rest of this book is all about."

And this is different from Tekumel, or Talislanta, or Glorantha, how?

Sure: http://seiyuu.com/okamoto/writing/

Somewhere online I posted that my daughter has rolled up a RQ2 newtling, and platypus, and a human. I'm preparing a RQ2 game that will center on the banks of the River of Cradles, from the perspecrive of the riveefolk, with a somewhat whimsical Wind in the Willows feel to it. It will be as canon as old school Prax usually got in practice, ie see the Okamoto logs for play examples. I will probably streamline the RQ2 rules somewhat, although I haven't settled on that yet. We will play when I transition my current group of teen and parent players (about nine players currently play regularly) away from my 2yr old Tekumel campaign. I got to hold off on the new campaign when the RQ2 kickstarter appeared -- I ordered a spanking-new hardcover of RQ2 for my daughter's birthday in July. I'm really looking forward to it!

I get it, the style of play among the vocal Gloranthan gamers (especially online) has shifted over the years. But read the Okamoto logs of Sandy Petersen's house RQ campaign. It's the old school, rollicking adventuring style. That's the way we played RQ back in the day. That's the way plenty of people rpg, Glorantha or otherwise. Anyone who'd gone on about deep mythology and immersed themselves in their character's culture wouldve been laughed out of the room. So, play however you like, but the currently popular style is not 'IT.'

One of the CA Smith Averoigne stories, as presented in the D&D module Castle Amber? Maybe?

I would prefer the line in Classic format. Including the products that weren't in the first four volumes. The re-organization and additional information is great to have.

Shannara = 1977. D&D = 1974.

My RQ2 book doesn't have its example character Rurik join a cult until after years of game play. It also makes a strong presentation for guilds as teaching sources. We never go overboard on cults. They have a place, but it's not necessary.

Temptation to tweak is too great? They hope to win over some fans who might otherwise not move to RQ2? Personally, I'd stick with RQ2, and maybe add a supplement of alternate rules modules for the incorrigible folks who can't resist fiddling with a masterpiece.

Personally, I guess I'm pleased at the direction you're going. It's less disruptive than I'd thought. If the updated runes and passions and personalities are somewhat modular, and the new rules set remains compatible with RQ2 and its line, and new scenarios can also be used with RQ2 with a minimum of fuss, then I (at least) get a decent compromise. I can look over the new rules additions, use only what I like, and ignore the rest. And I get new scenarios. So, I'll wait and see. Thanks.

In the past two years I have taken the original D&D variant, Empire of the Petal Throne, and 'upgraded' the rules to 1st ed AD&D. I'm running two different parties on different days (as the Professor did), and everyone is having a blast. I play pretty fast and loose nowadays. I had considered starting with Sandy's rules, and crafting my own BRP variant around them, but it was taking too long -- maybe too many choices? Anyway, we're having a blast. IMO, the group in charge of Tekumel gaming, The Foundation, is perpetuating the mistakes of the past.

You could look at the Gringles Pawnshop site: http://gringlespawnshop.proboards.com