Mankcam

I agree. I don't understand why BRP doesn't follow the GURPS/Savage Worlds/ Fate model in this respect. This is what I hoped the BGB would have achieved.

This. Totally this.

I would achieve the same thing by doing the opposite. Keep the healing rate, but use mook rules for most combats until end session combat or major villain combat. That way combats move quicker and less chance of injury to slow down momentum. Whichever method you choose, the main thing is to be mindful of character injury early in the session so it doesnt affect the pace of your game

I tend to resolve most situations either by simple or opposed rolls. Sometimes a situation will require several opposed rolls - typically with the loser of each of those rolls accumulating a cumulative difficulty level disadvantage until they now longer have the compacity to continue the contest. I use the above method for dramatic social interactions, and also apply modifiers for good/bad roleplaying. I even use it for simple combat (like 'Mooks' rules), and tend to use the more structured combat rules for when dramatic combat is the focus of a scene; usually only once a session, occasionally twice. This has worked reasonably well for my troupe, and its not much bookkeeping on the fly for a GM. I think having broad generic rules is the way to go these days, it makes it easier for the GM and players to follow. You also don't want a social conflict system to get in the way of roleplaying either, so nothing too simulationist I feel is the best path. I also like the way RD100 looks like handling dramatic non-combat scenes, and I might possibly use these rules at some stage, depending on the genre I am running at the time.

I run my sessions as 'narrative' as I can these days, and often resolve most dramatic issues with simple or opposed rolls, even straight forward conflict/combat at times. There are also numerous mook rules which can also be used for this, otherwise I just rule that the loser of the combat is at Half Skills % and if they fail another combat round then they are incapacitated. You could do the same thing for OQ/Pirates & Dragons, and rule the losers to receive an ascending modifier each time they fail in opposed combat rolls ( thus -25%, then -50%, then Incapacitated) I only use the 'crunchy' combat system for when I want combat to be the main focus of the scene - this happens once or twice a session for us, rarely anymore that that. Remember healing is very slow in BRP games. Many D&D players have issues with this because D&D regularly uses a Hit Dice roll to rally a character, but in BRP it's a weekly game time roll, so this really needs to be taken into account otherwise it can slow the momentum of the game down - I tend to use mook rules for most combats early in the episode ( as combat is more of a dramatic situation to move the plot forward at this stage), and move to combat round rules towards the end of the episode for the heightened drama. Most of the BRP games rules work very logically, and the great thing about using D100% chance mechanics is that is easy to make things up on the fly (eg: "there's a 40% chance the occupant is home" etc) If you are using Pirates & Dragons then it is very pulpy, so play up the more cinematic moments, but still watch out for the slow healing rate. Obviously use the 'Pirates Of The Caribbean' movies for inspiration as well

Given that I generally like slimmer core rule sets, if this can be achieved with many of the innovations that are in RQ6, then it'll be a great thing and I'll certainly be taking RQG it for a spin Otherwise I'm likely to keep using RQ6 for Glorantha as well as non-Glorantha settings. It will also come down to if my players can jump between systems or if they want to continue with one main system.

Yes, good point, that works well.

Heh heh this is excellent Sunwolfe

I think the first method described is the best of both worlds. The GM awards Improvement Points based on plot objectives achieved, and the player can choose which skill from the ticked boxes to spend it on without having to do training/research. Nice. I really like this approach.

I will continue to follow Design Mechanism as well as Choasium Moon Design, and hopefully get the best of both worlds. I guess it is up to the Design Mechanism fan base to promote the fact that whatever the new game Design Mechanism come out with, it will be essientially a rebranded RQ6. I am happy that Design Mechanism will be freed up to follow other pusuits, such as the Mythic series and Luther Arkwright, but I just hope they dont lose any commercial identity in the rebranding. I can understand Chaosium Moon Design wanting a tight hold of RuneQuest, and if its along the lines that Jeff said then it sounds good to me. My only concern is whether all these versions of BRP are going to strengthen or weaken the market. Only time will tell.

Well I'm good with all this, except I find it a bit raw referring to the next RQ as RQ4. RQ4 was MRQ, and MRQ2 was RQ5. Design Mechanism did the respectful thing of calling their independent edition RQ6. They even paid homage to RQ2 with a re-envisioning of the cover art, which was an excellent move. I think keeping that iconic artwork in some form will be good for the new game that DM put out, to help with product recognition, even if its a back cover or internal title page. So Chaosium should go with RQ7 or RQG (RuneQuest Glorantha), as its the logical and right thing to do by everyone involved in all subsequent editions, regardless of publication company. I'm good with the outline of the next RQ edition, as long as it remains reasonably compatible with RQ6 then I can play both interchangeably. The design aspects indicated are pretty much the things I like about RQ6, although I doubt we'll see combat effects and manuvers porting over, but I suspected that these would be streamlined for RQG even if DM had been involved. I can always use RQ6 as RAW with Glorantha in any case. I'm also happy that DM are freed up to pursue their other projects, and I'll support both systems if it sounds as good as it does in Jeff's press release. I guess in regards to Chaosium the weird thing now is CoC 7E is still the odd one out. I would have thought if such an overhaul in game mechanics were happening then there would be a move to make the RQ and CoC lines more similar in some respects, but I'm still reasonably happy things are turning out as they are.

Well this certainly doesn't sound anywhere near as grim as the news was earlier with RQ Glorantha being pretty much predominantly based on RQ2 mechanics. The adding two characteristics for skill bases certainly appeals to me, as do much of the design elements mentioned such as combat styles, hit locations, etc. Sounds more like a scaled-down version of RQ6 than it does a RQ2 clone. Which is not a bad thing, especially if it can be loosely compatible with RQ6. Well I will be the first to say this is much more welcome news than what greeted me this morning!

Most definitely no Fatigue Points please :-)

Isn't this already in contemporary publication, compiled alongside Cults of Terror under one cover, the Cult Compedium, in the Gloranthan Classics line? The material is excellent, but I thought it was all still in print

My preferences certainly lay with RQ6 at present, but up until this year I was running the BRP BGB as my base system, with my Glorantha fantasy setting running a RQ3/BGB mix. Seemed to work well. I started on RQ2 in the early 80s and jumped to RQ3 in the late 80s, it just seemed like the way to go. I grasped the RQ3 rules better as I was in my mid to late teens by then, so I didn't really reflect on what may have been lost in RQ2 during that transition. I had always assumed that the RQ3 mechanics were a progression from RQ2, rather than a sidestep. I knew hat a lot of Gloranthan richness had been lost, but mechanically I simply assumed RQ3 had been a logical successor. I do prefer the slim size of RQ2 as opposed to later publications. However, this has also been achieved with more contemporary BRP systems, look at Renaissance for example, and also OpenQuest Basic, and perhaps even GORE. When the BGB and MW lines were discontinued, I knew there was an effort to streamline the systems for the sake of consistency. I originally assumed that it would be a system consistent with CoC 7E, considering it will be a flagship game. I was happily surprised when it was announced that RQ6 would be involved in the Glorantha line. It didn't make commercial sense to have a system rivalling CoC 7E, yet I was happy all the same. Now it kinda looks murky again. So what are the obvious benefits of basing a contempoary rule set on RQ2 as opposed to game mechanics from RQ6, or even RQ3 and the recently shelved BGB? (I ask this in all honesty, as I want to know what the attraction is)

Yes what you say certainly rings true, however in many cases it will be matter of compromise. Player expectations certainly do impact on gaming pleasure, and while I do not give in to tantrums (nor expect them from my friends), I do try to compromise so we all get the best of both worlds. If I was GMing at a convention I would be more rigid in my expectations, but playing a game with old friends for pure enjoyment means we all have to find middle ground. I still really like the old tick box method of earlier BRP systems, but I just find RQ6 Improvement Rolls suits our troupe a bit better. Both methods are worlds above the standard 'leveling up' that D&D introduced to the hobby.

Yes that's certainly true regarding GM discretion, but in practice this can be a hard thing to manage, depending upon the troupe. I have found that players who have originally played other rpgs feel that GM discretion for experience checks is sometimes too controlling on the part of the GM, and they often feel entitled to their skill checks. I don't think think reflects on the GM, its just how it is. I certainly don't enjoy too much conflict over it and don't want to turn game sessions into HRM sessions, but it can put you at that crossroads if you stick to your guns too much over it. Players who started off with RQ/CoC or another version of BRP didn't seem to have any issues with it, so its a matter of perspective I think. In principle I prefer the RQ/BRP Skill Improvement method, but it has led to min/max issues over the years, or conflict around that. My players are predominantly a motley crue of old BRP, Rolemaster, White Wolf, and D&D players (broadly speaking). If they had more BRP origins then they probably would have similar expectations to me in this regard. So this is why the RQ6 Improvement Rolls just works better in my situation.

Yep, we must all do what we feel is right, of course, in the ways of The Force

In principle I liked the tick-box method, but unfortunately it led to what Soltakss and Smjn described above, and every long-running character turned out to be a jack-of-all-trades, with many being masters in everything. From a GM perspective, I greatly prefer the Improvement Rolls in Legend and RQ6. My RQ6 players are transitioning from BRP, so as a sweetener I meet them halfway with this. If they roll a critical success for a skill, I ask them to also make a base Common Knowledge roll at the end of the scene. If they do so, they gain an automatic Improvement Roll for that skill on the spot. It works nicely as a compromise between the two experience systems :-)

That's not the current news Trippy, RQG now looks like its going to be based on RQ2; it doesn't sound like much from RQ6 will make it into it. Only time will tell

Well I think RQG is going to look like RQ2 with new rules for Sorcery to cater for the Malkioni (which will be dramatically different from RQ3 Sorcery or RQ6's Sorcery I think). If the core skill structure is similar to MRQ SRD then I can go with that, as it could branch into RQ6 if needed. Sounds highly unlikely if RQ2 is going to be the core build however. It's a bit disappointing for fans, but probably a bit more creatively liberating for Design Mechanism to follow it's own path. I will support the Design Mechanism publications with interest, but also likely to follow Glorantha as well (old habits die hard). Remains to be seen which system I will use at the table for Glorantha, but at this stage its unlikely to be anything other than RQ6 or whatever Design Mechanism rename it. I wish I had managed to grab a copy of RQ6: AiG now!

It doesn't sound that way on the Design Mechanism forums. It would be great if it did. If Chaosium can bring out a cleaned up set of simplified BRP rules that could segway into RQ6, then that could work for me as a base system. It would need to have at least a similar skill structure to RQ6. But if its RQ2 written as is, then that's a nostalgic step backwards unfortunately, and that's how it appears at present.

.

Well I see this as a step back in many regards. I liked RQ2 back in the day, and am happy to support the kickstarter, but I was under the impression this was for nostalgia purposes. I kinda feel a almost betrayed now. I thought that RQ6 rules were going to be the base for the new system, well at least the fantasy system. To go back to RQ2 as the core system seems like an unusual thing to do, and I jumped off that boat back in my late teens. The new CoC 7E looks great, but I just feel that the skill structure from RQ6 works better for me. To base the new BRP on CoC 7E would have been logical, although not the best solution, but to base it off RQ2 is a very unusual decision, and I am quite disappointed by it, and almost feel the same sense of dismay that many felt when they saw MW being shelved. Considering I was backing the RQ2 Classic edition for nostalgia purposes, this feels almost a betrayal in a sense that I thought the funds would further the HeroQuest and RQ6 lines. I think I may reduce my pledge just to have the standard hardcover now, solely to have a print version of the old rules. There's not much point if the rules are going to be reprinted for RQ Glorantha anyway I will support Chaosium for it's Glorantha products purely for the content - I was already doing this with HeroQuest. I would prefer that Gloranthan content is now produced with no game stats whatsoever, leaving it up to us to choose which system to play it in. Perhaps pdfs of game stats could be bought as optional extras. I won't be using RQ2 for Glorantha, or a system based on CoC 7E, I will continue with RQ6 or whatever Design Mechanism comes up with, as their rules just work better for me. This is a big disappointment for me.

Well in its most recent published form, The Magic Book is a BRP product, but in its previous published form it was the Magic Chapter of RuneQuest 3rd edition, so take your pick where it belongs. But its game mechanics are certainly RQ3. By the time this book was republished as a BRP book it had already been surpassed in many ways by the more recent magic systems in BGB, MW, MRQ, MRQ2, Legend, and RQ6. I understand it was historically good, and I could see why it was put into monograph form, but when it was brought back as a printed book it was an unusual thing to do from my point of view. A reprint of the entire RQ3 would have caught my eye out of nostalgia, but this book by itself didn't float the boat So not sure where you discuss this one mate, but I almost guarantee that the Divine Magic rules will need to be house ruled in some fashion to meet your troupe's style of play; its almost a given. For what its worth, I incorporated the Allegiance rules from Stormbringer (which are now in the BGB). Many people did something like this, it was pretty much the next step to do. I used Allegiance to represent Faith to a particular deity, and allowed for a daily recharge based on that, but only after a period of contemplation, prayer, appeasement, etc ( approx an hour or so). The amount recharged depended upon the location. If in a mundane location, for every 20% of Faith I allowed 1 POW of Divine Magic recharge. This rate was more potent on holy ground, so for every 10% of Faith you regained 1 POW in a Shrine or sanctified ground; 2 POW in a Small Temple; 3 POW in a Medium Temple; and 4 POW in a Large Temple, etc. Any 'excess' points regained I allowed to be put into items as blessings, so these items were one-use magic items so to speak. I even allowed Priests to bless others with these excess points, which allowed them to have a less potent version of the spell at one-use (half POW spent on blessing). It worked okay for our troupe from memory. Most RQ3 GMs came up with some kind of quick fix in order to make RQ3 Divine Magic more playable.