Mankcam

It was a long time between drinks from when I bought RQ3 to when I purchased MRQ2 many years later. Like many of us I had tweaked the RQ3 Sorcery rules along the way to conform with how I envisioned the mechanics should play out. From memory I had developed something pretty much along the lines of Nick's idea above and it seemed to work well. I also conceptualised the Free INT idea much the same way as SDLeary has described. So, not too much tweaking to make the Magic Book work quite well, but yes, it was a pity that it was pretty much a reprint and not a reboot...

Well I guess Clockwork & Chivalry covers a steampunk setting during the English Civil War, and the Renaissance d100 system is very influenced by OQ. However it would be great to see OQ do a more Classic Steam Punk setting such as Victorian England thru to The First World War. I think there would be some interest in the setting, considering the popularity of the Steampunk genre. Perhaps even an Urban Sci-Fi/Fantasy/Steam punk hybrid setting would be good, much like the setting from the China Meveille books. Savage Worlds had a crack at this genre with their RunePunk book a few years ago, but I reckon a BRP related system would be a much better fit for such a gritty setting.

...mmm...your first choice certainly has its merits heh heh, but seriously, Steam Punk OQ could really rock

Disregard any criticism unless its civil and constructive I reckon. Getting back to the initial post topic, I think Rod's best options for CF are Legend or OpenQuest. Legend is OGL and already has a large following over at Mongoose, but it isn't the best fit for Old School, so perhaps not as many Legend fans would cross over to CF. OpenQuest, on the other hand, seems very much in the spirit of the earlier rpg scene and I think it would be easily adaptable for CF. Their company, D101 Games, tends to be quite in sync with Old School gaming and has some other products compatible with systems like 'Swords And Wizardry' (early style D&D retroclone). CF is doing pretty much the same style but with BRP related mechanics, so its certainly playing in the same ball park. In fact, the more I think about it, OpenQuest is definitely the logical place to go unless Rod creates his own system off the bat. Having said this, there are only some many BRP related product lines that the marketplace can support, and linking in with an existing product line would be a better move than starting a completely new one. So I'm another one who reckons OpenQuest is the best fit for building Classic Fantasy.

Yes, I'm certain it will contain much of the content originally intended for Pulp Cthulhu. Astounding Adventures hadn't been announced when I first started this thread, and I did raise the suggestion that a Pulp Setting book may be more useful than a Pulp Cthulhu book. This way it would appeal to a wider audience of BRP fans, and Cthulhu fans could easily introduce Mythos elements if they so desired. Personally I can't wait for the release of Astounding Adventures...

Well I guess the actual 7E rulebook itself won't be a big issue to me if the changes aren't too radical. If I like the changes I'll introduce them to my current CoC rules, but if not I'll keep on running the rules I have. Usually if I don't know a rule I just grab any edition of CoC at hand and use that. Later on if I find that it has been superseded in more recent editions then I just check with our troupe on which mechanic they prefer and go with that. Hopefully this will also be the case with 7E. My main concern, like many here have raised, is how compatible the supplements will be with previous edition supplements. I'm aware that the stat block will be presented a little differently, but as long as it is more or less compatible with previous editions of the game then I'm okay with that. The strength of CoC is definitely that it is well known to have great campaigns with a solid set of game mechanics that have endured thirty years or so. I can easily run a CoC 6E campaign using resources & supplements from the 3E rules and have few, if any, issues in regards to game mechanics. As long that this is more or less the case with 7E then I'll be happy, but if not then I'll probably have sour grapes as well. Time will tell, and it is only early days yet, I'll have to see how 7E shapes up closer to release, but I doubt Chaosium will disappoint on this release.

Awww...nope, still can't find it!

I wonder if there is anyway to get rid of the heart icon with the Likes button? I reckon a '+' sign would be just as effective, and way less 'gushy'...

This. They certainly have the runs on the field with this.

A mate of mine has Hero Lab and uses it for Shadowrun. It does do a nice job with the print out, although I wouldn't say it has a lot of flavour though. Well not enough for me to change over from my custom excel sheets for BRP/CoC. But he is happy with it. I think it would be a worthwhile purchase if you are running various systems using it, but there's not a great 'wow' factor if used solely for BRP/CoC.

$62 USD? That is a bit steep (but doable), but IF you can access a pdf copy with it for that purchase price then it works out more than reasonable It looks great to me, for RQ fans there's no question that it will be an essential book to have, and personally I can't wait to have a new copy of RuneQuest in my hands! Although without a hard cover book it may not attract new followers to pick it from the store shelves where it will be wedged in between D&D, Pathfinder, Savage Worlds, Hollow Earth, and White Wolf books, the majority of them good looking hardcovers. That's my main concern...

I agree, that whatever their other attributes are, all Gods would have to have ridiculously high POW attributes. This is in keeping with the concept that worshipers sacrifice POW to their deities in some way (blood, animals, labour, penance, prayer, etc), so the deities would have huge POW attributes as a result. This would undoubtedly impact upon their egos and confidence, which would be in keeping with the glory of the Olympians.

In my own homebrew Abilities rules, I tried to steer clear of the Abilities simply granting a bonus to skills, as I thought this could make the beginning characters too powerful as well as ruining the thrill of making skill checks. I tried to keep as many things as narrative as possible, such as Abilities that could widen the scope of skills or characteristic rolls, reduce situational modifiers, or Abilities that granted additional traits (ie: Ambidextrous is a good example of the later). I also had what I called 'Specialties' which I based off the Martial Arts model. With Martial Arts, if you roll under your Fist or Kick, and if it is also under your Martial Arts skill, then you do double damage. I broadened this concept to be 'if you roll under your skill and it is also under your Specialty then you receive a Special Success or some other Special Effect'. Given the fact that Specialties are trainable (at a slower rate however, +1D3% per Exp Check), it means that you can increase your chance of Special Success with particular skills, making them quite potent traits for experienced characters. Two examples of Specialties from my home rules: *Fire Elementalist - If a caster is successful in casting a spell which involves a fire trapping and the roll is also under their Fire Sphere Speciality then they have achieved a special success with that spell. *Florentine Fighter - When fighting with two blades, if the character additionally rolls under their Florentine skill when they make a successful Sword attack then they receive an immediate additional weapon effect (attack or parry) within that same DEX rank. Just some ideas on how Abilities/Disadvantages can be used a little differently. I agree that if Merits/Flaws are just used to modify skill % then it's not much point really. Anyway, food for thought...

Sounds a bit like a Ridley Scott sci-fi to me. Hmmm I might get this after I see Prometheus and maybe my troupe might be up for a one-shot or so

Actually I did something similar to how Rust has described, and it seemed to work out reasonably well.

I agree with you Rust in the fact that most Merit/Flaw systems can be detrimental in characterisation, but I think that's where GM responsibility comes into it. It's the same for normal Char gen though - the GM decides what character level the game is set at initially in regards to beginning skill point allocation, and I think a Merit/Flaw system needs to be regulated in the same way. For example, for pulp settings that I allow my home brew Abilities/Disadvantages I grant all player-characters one Trademark Ability of their choice as part of character creation. If they wish to choose beyond this, then yes, I do specify that they choose a Disadvantage to 'balance' it. It hasn't seemed implausible for our games, and in most cases with pulp comic book genres such as Adventure or Superhero etc you find that heroes often have an Achilles Heel or two. I do tend to rope things in though, even for these settings, often with a rule that more than two disadvantages becomes a bit ridiculous. I guess that is the kind of thing for individual GMs to decide, and in some cases if left unchecked it would run rampant (or just end up as GURPS...). I don't mind doing it how you suggest either, although I know one of my players would have major issues with it, being a veteran of too many other systems which use a highly structured Merits/Flaws system. I do see a role for Merits/Flaws for cinematic genres, but not for serious ones, and I guess that's really the point I was trying to emphasize. At present I'm running Call of Cthulhu again so Merits/Flaws are certainly not part of this setting at present. Horses for courses I guess

I've used an Abilities/ Disadvantages system for years, partly based from MRQ2 Heroic Abilities, with ideas from GURPS, WoD, Savage Worlds etc. In my opinion it works quite well for flavour in particular settings, my favourites for this are Heroic Fantasy or Pulp Era Adventure. I also tend to use a version of the BRP Fate rules with these settings as well, it just adds to the cinematic feel. For playing historic, grim, dark settings I would advise against using such mechanics however, as the emphasis is more on the 'struggle' of the characters, rather than upon the 'heroics'. So if I play BRP in Glorantha or Mythic Greece I use Abilities/Disadvantages, but if I play BRP Stormbringer, or say a BRP Game of Thrones for instance, then I'ld steer clear of such a system. If I'm playing Pulp 1920s -1950s Adventure I tend to use Abilities/ Disdvantages I have ripped off from such games like Adventure!, Thrilling Tales, or Spirit Of The Century. But if I'm running a BRP Classic Horror I use Call of Cthulhu as written. If I was to run BRP Star Wars it would definitely use a Merits/Flaws concept, but if I was to run a BRP Star Trek or a Sci-Fi Horror like Aliens/Event Horizon etc then I certainly wouldn't include them. You get the idea. So my take on the whole Merit/Flaw concept is not an argument whether it is encouraging mini-maxing or not (it doesn't do this anymore than any other aspect of Char Gen - it's up to the GM on how to rule that). I believe it's all about what flavour you want for your game genre. It's great for pulpy adventure stuff, but the bane for historical or grim settings. Chaosium has excelled in the later with product lines for Elric/Stormbringer, Nephillim, and Call of Cthulhu, so it's easy to see why most BRP adherents are not into the whole Merit/Flaws concept. I think Chaosium will tend to keep producing these kind of settings for BRP as it is their niche, so the system itself wouldn't be enhanced by any rules that add Merits/Flaws to these genres. Actually any steps in that direction may displace the actual feel of realism inherent in the system, which is why so many have been attracted to the system for so long I think. As it stands, BRP is a great fit for these serious settings and is a good example of mechanics married to genre in my opinion. It will be interesting to see what comes out with 'Astounding Adventures' though, as that looks like an upcoming BRP Pulp Era supplement which will be really going against the grain of the rest of the Chaosium settings. http://www.chaosium.com/article.php?story_id=521 Perhaps there may be some kind of Merit/Flaw concept in there, and I'ld certainly welcome it in a product like that.

Wow! This looks great! I love the cover artwork, it's up there with the Pulp covers for WW Adventure, SW Thrilling Tales, and Hollow Earth. Really two-fisted pulpy stuff, brilliant. Although I got tired of waiting for Pulp Cthulhu and started my own Pulp Cthulhu campaign - just a few tweaks to the usual rules, and now I'm using 1920s Cthulhu resources & scenarios to run a Low Pulp campaign. Getting so much more mileage out of Call of Cthulhu now, alot of fun. I'ld like to see what the official Pulp rules are however, as it didn't take much to use the current BRP rules for Pulp actually. In any case this product is now certainly on my wish list!

Well, I left my comments on the DM site, and needless to say I'm pretty enthusiastic with the glimpse of the upcoming RQ rulebook. Yep, it certainly does, much more than Mongoose's editions. I'm quite impressed!

Considering my Fantasy campaign was set in Glorantha, I used the prices from the AH RQ3 rulebook and also from the Arms of Legend supplement book (well, I actually used its previous edition, MRQ2 Arms & Equipment). I would certainly see no issue using a good resource like GURPS Low-Tech for pricing if that title is in your collection.

Yes, this is getting back to the basics of 'role-playing' over 'rule-playing'. Characterisation and narrative play is what interests me, not all the fiddly specy stuff. I can get that spec fix from MMOs and PC games, and it's not really what I look for in the role-playing hobby. There is certainly a charm in the 'less is more' approach. I really like having my Cthulhu 6E and BRP BGB, but a part of me misses the simplicity of the slim rulebooks of the earlier Call of Cthulhu editions over the current Cthulhu and BRP tomes of today. They just seemed much more freeform than the current editions, which actually encouraged lot of creativity. Maybe it's just a 'limbic' thing though Despite this, I do see an opening for a very detailed BRP SciFi supplement with equipment lists and whatnot, and Hard SciFi is probably the only setting I'ld want to have nutted out at this level. Hard SciFi without all the techie stuff is, like Rust said, like Fantasy without magic, well High Fantasy in any case. It just goes like Peaches n Cream. If it ain't Hard SciFi then its just Pulp Space Adventure and its more flavour than detail, and you wouldn't need to look much beyond the BGB to portray this. I certainly wouldn't want to run or play in ANY setting where equipment and stats overtook the emphasis of actual role-playing. It's just not what I signed up for.

Amazing. You're on a completely different continent, yet we must of married the same woman. The sad plight of mature gamers-with-families everywhere it seems heh heh...

I have run a Fantasy campaign for the last few years which used both Status and Loot, and it seemed to go quite well actually. I used the Status skill for two uses: Influence and Wealth. 'Influence' was a modifier to social rolls, with characters receiving +/- 10% per Social Class level difference from the person they were interacting with. This was a rule that brought Social Class to the fore, and I thought it was quite apt for the setting. 'Wealth' rolls were used to determine the chance of resources on hand to secure everyday services, such as meals, accommodation, trade services, travel costs etc. Here I asked for a Status d100% roll, with the character receiving a +/- 10% modifier to their Status roll per level of difference in regards to the wealth level of the services they required. This was quite useful for everyday expenses, and saved everyone checking their bank balance every five minutes. In addition to this I had 'Loot' which was coinage, barter goods etc which had a cash value, and that was acquired in game. Loot was used to pay for 'additional expenses', that is, something outside of what I used Wealth rolls for. This mainly involved buying specific equipment, weapons, armour, spell training, temple donations etc. The above system worked well for my Fantasy campaign, it didn't feel clumsy or anything, and it really brought Social Class issues to the fore. In my current 'Pulp Cthulhu' game I'm using the same rules, except I don't worry too much about giving Loot a monetary value. The idea of acquiring loot and equipment for financial gain is much more central in a fantasy setting, whereas Loot in my current setting mainly involves finding old tomes or accessing weird science gadgets etc so it's not stuff that can be used for currency generally. Anyway, the above concepts have worked for me for the past 2 - 3 years or so.

I didn't realize it read that strongly Frogspawner. It certainly wasn't intended as such. Sorry mate, I'll keep out of it

'nuff said on the matter I reckon heh heh