Mankcam

Being Australian I am totally stoked that there is a Colonial Australia Cthulhu resource for CoC7E! Such an interesting piece of history which is ripe for a gaming experience. Excellent production for a Pay What You Want product, and having its own character sheet is an added bonus. This really made my day!

It all looks quite interesting I think. It's not BRP, but it still looks pretty good

Yes they don't seem to be available in print form yet on Chaosium's webstore. Not far away I guess, given that Kickstarter backers have received them this month, and the first wave of pre-order customers are also receiving copies which were ordered by Backerkit. Hopefully you won't have long to wait for general release. The books look great, and if you can find them with the slipcase it's a really nice product. Even without the slipcase you'll be likely to be happy with them in your collection. I would also order the hardcover Pulp Cthulhu book to go alongside the others when it is released (also not too far away)

Could the definition of 'Spirit Magic' with some cultures perhaps be interpreted as being akin to a concept of interaction with 'intuitive energy'? This may be in keeping with how the Malkioni define it, given the example above. " there is a magical energy that surrounds everything 'living' thing" hmmmm George Lucas and Greg Stafford perhaps on a similar wave length here, heh heh

That's kind of how I remember RQ3 Spirit Magic. It really suited Praxians and possibly Orlanthi, but just didn't seemed to fit my views of how Malkioni or Dara Happans may use Basic Magic. However my Gloranthan resources were limited back then, so my interpretations of the cultures were different. I think I kind of like having an option wherein that common folk can learn to connect with their Spirit selves and retain 'portions' of that connection whilst in the Mundane Realm, which manifest in the form of extraordinary abilities or magical effects. This works well for me, as it doesn't totally fly against the RQ2 idea of Basic Magic being presented as 'spells' or 'magical talents'. I quite like it, although I don't think that RQ3 Spirit Magic was originally intended this way; I suspect it was more how Iskallor describes in the previous post. If I had to make a quick houserule, I would deem that it probably costs more POW to learn ( or time) to connect with your own Spirit Self, although the upside is that you don't require any foci once you have the connection to that magical effect (perhaps have runic tattoos to portray the connection). This would allow the option for some cultures to do it this way, whilst allowing others to keep foci with spirits bound into them as presented in RQ3. So it's a marriage between how I view RQ2 Basic Magic and RQ3 Basic Magic, and it would depend upon the culture and cult which path is taken. Not sure if this would work well for everyone's setting, or how incompatible this will be in CRQ4. I'll have to see how it is presented in the new rules before making any judgement, but I suspect it is not how it will be in CRQ4. No problems either way.

.

It has always seemed clear to me that the separation in core mechanics between CoC 7E and the new RQ is intentional by design. However both games have origins in BRP , so from my perspective it makes some sense to have similar Characteristics and skill resolution mechanics. Actual skill lists and almost everything else can be modular, individualised to the setting and the game itself. But I suspect that the new RQ is RQ2 plus new rules. This is a good thing, given the solid foundation of the RQ2 platform. Despite this, I can also see merit is some consistency between the two current BRP lines, to make it easier to play both systems.

I just didn't get this impression from RQ2 Basic/Battle Magic, and the term Spirit Magic didn't grab me all that much in RQ3. It just felt too animistic for some of the cultures. For example, I couldn't see Seshnelan townsfolk using spirit foci (however we didn't have clear impressions of Malkioni back then either). The fact that common people use this magic in everyday practices was such a big feature of RuneQuest when it was initially conceived, and remains a hallmark of Glorantha to this day. I have really liked most of Moon Design's interpretation of Glorantha, so I'm very interested in seeing how Basic Magic rolls out in the next edition, as it will have quite a big impact on the portrayal of Glorantha as a setting.

I actually like the idea of 'rolling doubles' for Special Successes, although it would be inconsistent with most other editions of BRP. It is a very simple gamist innovation, and looks like it could work well for Delta Green. I'ld be happy with it in RQ. However the CoC 7E success levels are more of an expansion to the current Classic BRP success levels, just introducing one more success level, although this can play a big role in the skill resolution system. It doesn't mean all the skill scores for each success level need to be on a character sheet like suggested in CoC7E, as the Quick Reference chart is a synch to look at, especially if the players have one each. I totaly agree that having busy looking character sheets are not the way to go, but it isn't necessary in any case. I don't mind the digital autocalc sheets for CoC 7E, but hand writing them looks needlessly complex and I won't be putting all the fiddly scores on the sheet. Having an extra success level doesn't feel very complex to me, it actually feels very logical. As I have stated elsewhere, I think it may also be good for some consistency for skill resolution between the contemporary Chaosium BRP rule sets to make it easier for everyone to easily adapt to.

I liked the term Basic Magic better than Battle Magic, due to not every spell being a combat spell. I didn't like the Spirit Magic title from RQ3 as it didn't make sense for me to have spirits as foci trappings for every culture. I prefer MRQ2/Legend's term Common Magic, or just stick with Basic Magic (which RQ2 Battle Magic was listed as an example). Spirit Magic does seem an odd one to bring back.

I think it may be good if the new RQ has some consistency with the CoC 7E combat rules, which are presented as being reasonably simple. The Attacker chooses to Fight, Maneuver, or Move; whilst the Defender chooses to Fight Back, Dodge, or Move. That's it. Despite its simplicity, it can actually cover quite a lot of ground. Fight is the same as Attack. Dodge and Move are self explanatory. However, the choice of choosing to Maneuver is a catch-all that allows the attacker to describe what they want to occur, which can cover broad things like cinematic stunts, feints, startling, etc. For the defender, Fighting Back is essentially Parry, except if the defender achieves a better success than the attacker then they can describe additional effects like riposte, disarm etc. Everything else is covered by applying a simple bonus or penalty modifier to an action if it is more complicated than usual, so alot of ground can also be covered by this rule if it is applied to the Fight, Fight Back, and Dodge options. Actions like disarming, defensive fighting, aimed blows etc spring to mind here, but it really only limited by the imagination of the combatants. That's the general gist of it from what I have read so far, if I understand them correctly. It looks quite loose yet open enough to cover most of the combat effects that you see in RQ6. Hit Locations are only optional, and it has a Major Wound system. The increased focus of melee in RQ is better served by default Hit Locations with limb HP, but this could still work with the combat resolution described in CoC 7E. I haven't seen it in gameplay yet, but from the outset it looks like something I would like to run.

Being a CoC 7E kickstarter backer, I have just received the first version of the Pulp Cthulhu pdf (unsure if it is the final version yet). I can see it has a number of optional rules that you can plug into play to adjust for the level of pulp you want. Mainly stuff like expanded rules for Spending Luck and it also has rules for Pulp Talents. A few other dials here and there, it looks like it will be a good supplement. I don't think I should explain the actual rules mechanics of an unpublished supplement, but I can say that it likely will be of interest for you if you are running a campaign like MoN or HotOE. I would probably add about half of the options to my MoN campaign to run it at the low to moderate level of Pulp that I like. If you really take it up a few notches then you can play it at Doc Savage level or even pulpier. The rules also have character Archetypes which streamline char gen a bit. Most of the other stuff is narrative content like 1930s background and advice on the pulp genre and how to run a pulp game. But if you are looking at kicking things off now then just run CoC 7E with the Push and Luck options. Perhaps allow the characters some trademark abilities that enable them to cheapen the cost for Luck expenditure in particular situations. You could easily replace these with the official Pulp Talents rules once the supplement is released, or just continue with it, whichever works best for you. I think one of the big things with MoN is to keep the threats at human level as much as possible, especially in the first few chapters, just revealing the true mythos bit by bit. The main thing with pulp adventure games is probably allowing very broad definitions with what can be achieved through skill use, and having a tongue in cheek approach rather than a purist creeping horror and simulationist flavour. As with any immersive setting, use online images to really evoke things. For instance, Google Images makes it so easy to find pics from 1920s Cairo. I dont think there are any major concerns running MoN with the 7E rules, it all ports almost seamlessly. This kind of compatibility is a hallmark of BRP games, and another reason the system is a sound investment. MoN is a great campaign if you want more 'Indy Jones meets the Mythos' kind of thing. Other GMs may see some pitfalls that I haven't seen, so the collective knowledge of these forums may offer you some other insights. Have fun with it

Sorry, I somehow got the notion that there wasnt a way to do char gen for novice level characters - I obviously didnt read Jeff's post properly. This is what happens when reading forums via a smart phone. This is also how forum threads go off on hysteric tangents - my apologies if this one is due to me Well that all sounds reasonable to me. Setting the game for competent characters is a good idea, and having the option for beginners as well works for me. Yeah I remember having newbies doing the Apple Lane scenarios and a few street level Pavis games. I certainly wouldn't have thrown them too deeply into all the juicy stuff like The Rubble or Dorasor at that stage.

I am definately going to upgrade to CoC 7E for my MoN campaign. Characteritics get converted to x5% on the fly; that should not be an issue. Most Skills are the same or have analogies, so the NPC blocks work just as good. The Push Rolls and the Spending Luck rules would be essiential, not optional. The Pulp Cthulhu supplement book will have a choice of other options that may be of assistance as well. It will be published reasonably soon I think.

I certainly don't mind the new RQ game being pitched at competent characters as a default. I probably prefer it in some ways. My troupe usually has characters who are a bit seasoned from the start. It makes survivability a bit better and we may never play enough to truly do the hours needed for the 'zero to hero' character journey However I still think the BGB did reasonably well by allowing GMs to choose what competence range the PCs start in. I think it would be wise to keep something similar as an option for the next RQ. SD Leary's notion of putting it in an Appendix is a good idea. That way the option still exists, but it sends a message that it is not the default level for putting characters through any published campaigns. Authors happy. Nostalgic gronards also happy :-)

I am certainly happy you can start as expert skilled characters, but I would prefer having the choice of different experience levels in the char gen process. Starting at a heroic level can be alot of fun, but starting much less profficient also has its charms. One of the things I enjoyed back in the RQ2/RQ3 days was having characters surviving by the skin of their teeth, patchwork armour, scrambling around for every coin or salvage good. Threats were not always fantastical, they were often just human level, and a party of Uz was a greatly feared encounter. It sometimes felt more like Mad Max more than The Iliad, and I really liked that. 'Zero to Hero' does have a niche, so it would be good if different starting experience ranges are an option I think, even if the focus in more on experts (I guess it is the start of The Hero Wars). The other thing I really like with RQ is the tactile flavour of combat, so I am happy to see that this sounds like it is remaining. Streamlining combat by losing Hit Locations wasnt the best move for the Elric! line in my opinion, so I'm happy to see alot of the juicy stuff from RQ2 remaining for this new edition.

In this day and age of pulpy systems like FATE and such, I kind of like the old school approach of 'zero to hero', although I must admit we often tended to start with PCs of at least moderate experience to increase their survivability. I like how the BGB gave you different char gen points based on whether the characters were novices, seasoned, veteran, experts, etc I assume that the new RQ will take a similar approach. The main thing is that there is some way to account for starting with experienced PCs instead of forcing everyone to start with novice dirt crawlers .

I agree, I don't like the busy looking character sheets of CoC 7E due to this. The digital versions are okay, but if you have to hand write a sheet it looks very hectic and complicated, more like an accountant's ledger than a character sheet. However you can easily have the CoC 7E skill resolution and just record the Characteristics and Skills at the regular % values. It's very easy for the GM to reference the Quick Reference Chart in gameplay, and even quicker if every player has a copy of one with their character sheet.

I totally agree that the CoC 7E skill resolution approach is the best way to go. It is intutitive, it runs smoothly and it works well; plus it would be good to see some consistency in the new rulesets.

Looks great! I wonder if this title be available in hardcover?

From your description Vile this sounds pretty close to a streamlined BRP with different Characteristics. This was a great dystopian sci-fi series, a top show in its day and a setting that could really be good for a rpg. Pity this never made it bigger. Great find!

You might as well call it Mythras, as that's what it will be in a few months. Great setting though, best of luck with it

Not sure what is happening with ToC 2E, I think I read that it may be a possible kickstarter project at some stage. In regards to my own house rules for the Stretching Luck mechanic I think I may end up going for a Stretching Your Luck to be 1 Luck Point for 5% of skills points. It seems pretty cinematic, and I think it sounds reasonable, not too overpowered for low to mid pulp settings.