Mankcam

Eclipse Phase is a mind-blowing concept to run, given it is a Transhumanist tech level. Great narrative, but not an easy plot to GM. It has a D100% core skill mechanic, but is a very complex game in terms of game mechanics as well as concept. Traveller remains one of the best scifi settings to game in IMO, esp its char gen has alot of flavour. However if wanting to do scifi with BRP then I quite like OQ River of Heaven for smooth game mechanics and it also has a good premise. Plus it would be quite easy to retrap for Shadowrun or a Cyberspace setting if that is desired. I hear M-Space is great as well, it is also on my radar for scifi, but given it is Mythras then it will play more crunchier than OQ, so it depends on GM preference for these things.

Very cool !!!

Sometimes having all the skills listed on the character sheet can be a bit overwhelming to new players. I get around this by making my own sheets and only typing in the skills that have been developed during char gen, and I always organise them under Skill Categories (even for CoC I use the Skill Categories from BRP BGB). This way the sheet isn't overloaded with 'skill bloat', and the Skill Category headings make it easy to locate skills. The actual percentile concept is an easy measure to grasp. My 11 yr old understands it quite well, and would think it odd to measure RPG skills in any other way. The biggest issue I have had is that some players find it difficult to grasp the idea of rolling low is better than rolling high in regards to percentile dice, feeling that it is counter-intuitive. Obviously they just don't get the notion that it is a %. Many D&D players often initially feel that the spell lists for RQ are lacking in quantity, although after a while many prefer the actual magic mechanics to their 'fire and forget' spells from D&D. Sometimes they have an issue with Basic/Spirit Magic being available to everyone in RQ, but once they see that this is a narrative setting-specific counterpart of a Feats/Advantage system then they are often cool with it. I have found that players from most non-D20 games adapt easier than those only raised on D&D fare. Players who are completely green to RPGs are often the best as they tend to focus on the narrative of what they can do, and many of these grasp the concept of percentile skills very quickly.

My formula would be read how Theylans are portrayed in the G2G (and HQ Red Cow book - look at Google images of Mycenaeans & Thracians for inspiration), and adapt that to Apple Lane, playing Gringles Pawnshop and Rainbow Mounds. Then either adapt the upcoming HQ Red Cow campaign to RQ if you want to play in Sartar, or find a reason to shift the setting to Pavis & Prax, as from there you can play scenarios from the Pavis, Big Rubble, and Borderlands books for mileage.

Totally agree with the 'fiction first' concept regarding manuvers, spot rules and sucht. I often use this as a gauge of how much I like a rpg's game mechanics. BRP is probably one of the first systems that did this quite well, and still one of the best.

Bladesharp for the pointy end, and Bludgeon for the blunt hammer end

This was a great idea when the Design Mechanism did it, and its gonna look great with the new Chaosium edition of RQ! Yes yes yes

Lethality certainly is inherent in any of the BRP Family of games. In regards to Call of Cthulhu, for one-shot sessions or brief investigations I like to dress up the horror element and I run standard 'purist' rules. However for long campaigns I prefer more action and humour, so I use 'pulpy' rules in order to keep heroes alive long for a reasonable duration. I am running Pulp Cthulhu 7E which has heaps of optional rules to help the player-characters, such as Luck, Talents, etc. For action scenes I run alot of Mooks rules as the default, as it keeps the story fast-paced. This is different to the standard CoC investigation, as these characters are more like characters portrayed in Indiana Jones and The Mummy movies, rather than Lovecraft's 'armchair academics'; so fast paced action is essential to the pulpy flavour. However if the combat situation is pivotal to the story line, or is otherwise a centerpiece of a scene, then I tend to shift back to the standard combat rules to heighten the drama. Even in a pulpy setting, the BRP/CoC combat rules are very dangerous, and damage rolls can drop a hero very quick. The best advice I have read regarding acknowledging the lethality aspect is before starting the game with narrative, simply show the players the damage for small weapons (1D4 to1D6). Then show them the damage for a medium weapon (1D8). Explain that melee weapons may have an additional DB, whereas ranged weapons may have more than one attack per round. Finally show them their Hit Points, and ask them how many times can they sustain damage rolls? Remind them that natural healing is slow, even with hospitalisation. Magic that does quick-healing is quite rare and obscure (and often not without other consequences). Let all this sink in, and a sense of vulnerability will be there from the start, hopefully dictating them to be cautious as every HP is a worthwhile point to keep. Even in a pulpy game the characters need to be mindful, especially regarding some of the more exotic opponents. Player-characters surviving is far less a certainty than it is in most D20 system games. If you run a purist CoC game (as opposed to a pulpy CoC game), then this unpredictability is even greater, to the point where a typical session or two often sees at least one investigator going insane or is killed. The irony is that it is this unpredictability that really adds to the enjoyment of everyone involved, regardless of playing pulpy or purist, and is one of the strengths of BRP games.

Excellent review I already have the pdf via crowd funding, but never really get into these things too much unless I am holding the printed book in my hands. I quite like how the system, in it's basic form, seems to be similar to OpenQuest, but has bolt-on optional rules which can make it play about the same complexity as Mythras. Yet it is quite distinct from both, and does also have some very modern tweaks to the rule set. This review is quite good, and now I'm eagerly waiting for the printed book to be delivered so I can take a better look. Revolution D100 could easily end up being my 'go-to' generic system, kinda a new version of what the BRP BGB represented to me.

I see what you did there, heh heh

MOB you are such a bugga mate you know we can't wait until June for this!

I agree with this implication that this spell is intended to affect living organisms rather than inanimate objects. I have never heard of an inanimate object's mass referred to as a 'body' in commonly spoken English, and the reference usually pertains to a living creature. Yes, the term 'Body' can actually technically refer to the mass of anything, but in commonly spoken English language it usually indicates a living creature, so I have always interpreted the spell description as pertaining to such. So I personally feel very clear with not being able to use Disrupt on most inanimate objects. However to throw a spanner in the works - does this mean it works on trees and plants? And if so, does it work on wooden furniture and such? My feeling is that is doesn't work on wood, as it is no longer a 'living organisms', but it possibly could work on plants (unless there is a Gloranthan mytho-rationale that prevents such), or perhaps it doesn't, purely because a plant has no POW. By this reckoning it would not work on the Undead either...hmmm

I'm sure Jeff has mentioned somewhere that there will be Spirit Magic in the new RQ

I think Spirit Magic works fine in RQ not being cumulative, as it is everyday folk magic that is helpful, rather than mythical feat-level magic. So I doubt there will be too many changes from this concept in any upcoming RQ rules. However I suspect that higher level magic could potentially be very powerful in the new RQ. Rune Magic, Sorcery, etc may possibly be able to be combined with other likewise casters to replicate feats of magic as portrayed in HQ. I cannot remember reading anything along those lines from the design notes, but it would stand to reason that the new RQ could do this, so that the portrayal of Glorantha is somewhat consistent with HQ. Pure speculation, of course.

OpenQuest is basically Mythras without Hit Locations and Combat Manuvers. If these things are too clunky then I totally agree with Jakob's comment: Definately play OpenQuest instead, and port Mythras scenarios as you see fit. OpenQuest Basic has almost everything you need for a low cost (and free pdf). The full version builds upon it, but isn't necessary. OpenQuest also has a few campaign books, but won't have the ongoing support Mythras has. Both systems are really similar, but OpenQuest is less complex if that is what the OP is after.

Well I think an example like that proves Disrupt was only intended for living beings. I remember its original intention was to stun a recipient, there was even discussions about its everyday use being to stun rodents and such. Not sure if casting a lot of low magic has a culminative effect or not. Given the consequences can be real game-changers then I suspect not.

Very interesting thread, the more insights into Makionism the better!

Well that's a shame. The Future Earth book was a great setting for BRP, and deserved to be expanded in a fully realised setting. I would really have preferred that it used a BRP system as a core system (regardless of whether it's BGB, CoC 7E, RQ, Mythras, OQ, Renaissance, Revolution D100, etc). I don't think I'll follow it over to something like FATE or it's own system. As much as I like the setting, my 'GM hat' thinks mainly in BRP Family game mechanics these days, so I'm not that big on learning completely new systems anymore. Getting back to the original post, I'm pretty happy that we look like seeing more work from Jon Snead somewhere in the contemporary BRP Family of games.

Very cool !!! I just saw this and immediately purchased the pdf. Gonna have some fun reading this tonight. Can't wait for the hardcover print release!

I think this is pretty much the era that DM are currently developing for their upcoming Mythic Greece setting

Love the cover art for both of these titles!

I totally agree with this. Rather than pay someone for a licence, Loz & Pete should focus on developing psuedo-historical settings as there is no licence, and everyone already has a baseline understanding of the setting. It's a win/win. The 'Mythic' titles work very well (as well as link to the Mythras namesake). Mythic Britain is brilliant, as is Mythic Rome (although I am not overly fussed on the internal art direction in the book). Mythic Greece is in the works, and Mythras will be great playing in such a setting. I think they should just consolidate their efforts and focus on publishing resources for each of these setting lines. Mythic Greece alone could set them up for life, look at the continual interest in such a setting with films like Troy, Clash Of The Titans, 300, etc. It never gets old.

That's certainly a great idea having Animal Barbarians riding the larger bison similar to the prehistoric bison. It certainly is in keeping with other Animal Barbarians, such as the Sable Riders whose sables are obiviously much larger than our contemporary variety.. Yeah go down this path David, it's already making the Praxians much more interesting

yikes! :-0

I cannot remember if Newt's version expressed them as a % or not. I don't think so. It was more like having a Runic Affinity gave you bonus modifiers with actions or magic which were relevant to the Rune. From the announcements it looks like Runes are expressed as a % in the new RQ, as they look like they will fulfill a similar role to that of Pendragon's Personality Traits as well as performing Rune Magic. I don't mind there being a skill for such, the earlier versions of RQ had a skill % for Rune/Divine Magic. I do remember I disliked how it was calculated, and also how the game mechanics regarding Runes were non-existent. At least it looks like Runes will play a major part of the game now, which is logical given that the title suggests this. What i don't want to see is introducing too many new complex rules. These days I prefer to hand-wave alot of things, so overly complex simulationist rules are not my thing anymore.