frogspawner

Looks pretty good to me!

Well, f.ex. SIZ is gone, which I know is a stat that many people like.

Fine by me. Are HP purely based on CON, then? Or Weight?

I hope you did not delete EDU...

Isn't d100rules for Fantasy settings, where EDU doesn't usually feature?

In many ways, I think SIZ actually simplified many interactions.

There'll still be Weight, though - and if you measure weight in Stones, you have a perfectly usable SIZ-equivalent number right there. I suspect "SIZ is gone" just means it's modifiers on various skills, and similar (over-?)complications, will be gone. Right?

And most of the rules are not identical to any found in RQ3, BRP or MRQ. Probably many of them that the old-school BRP gamers won't like at all. We'll see.

C'mon then - let's see! Which ones?

The main improvements is that the rules are simpler and easier to memorize and that combat works in a faster way. :cool:

Why so coy? (I'm all set to buy-in-bulk and hand them out my mates, but I'm not going to do that without knowing...)

Improvement One: It's in print. (But I was really hoping for more than just that).

The trollkin isn't dying! He just needs to get his club back!

Just so long as the gross green frog-thing has the upper hand, that's all that matters.

So what are the top three improvements d(100)Rules has over RQ2?

A severed femoral artery alone kills you very quickly. With the lower part of your arm you'd probably have more time though.

Oh yes? How quickly, in reality? I use Total HPs, rolling location only on a significant (e.g. killing) blow - but then players have been expressing dissatisfaction with 'immediately' lethal blows to arms/legs.

For what it's worth, I reckon "BRP: Classic Fantasy" sounds classier than the others, anyway.

I'd say, just work out how much you feel each race is worth in Skill Points, and deduct that many from the points available to spend in character creation.

I use that idea (max-per-spell of 1MP per 10% magic skill) and it works fine. That's with low-ish skill and non-standard spells, but I guess it'd be ok otherwise too.

Deriving MP from Lore skills as well might overcomplicate things. Magical Lores should probably be useful in their own right.

Same here. I'd stick with the traditional 3-18 scale for INT, and carry it over unchanged from D&D. Your conversion is easier that way, too!

For a quick-and-dirty conversion of SIZ, I'd say SIZ = HP x 2

(AD&D HP that is. Not sure if the 3.5 variety would work so well. Obviously, that's the HP due to biggness, of course - ignore that component of D&D HP which comes from "fighting skill" or "luck" or whatever...)

Of course not - we're all part of the same family. I read that in someone's sig, so it must be true.

"And most murders happen within the family" ? :shocked:

I just don't understand why there are two different ways of dealing with exactly the same kinds of situations.

That's one of the reasons I object to opposed rolls! But then, I do combat the way it was in RQ (interacting results of independent rolls), not the new BRP way using ORs. I suspect many do likewise (or at least I hope they do!)

Opposed Rolls are a new-fangled innovation, and not to everyone's taste. (You find them easy? I'm amazed!)

Regarding MRQ and D&D, from an Aldryami perspective, the forest is there, but there is no song to be heard. Quiet. Empty. A shadow.

Maybe it is like seeing in colour when most people only see in black and white. How do you explain the depth and experience of colour to the others?

Nice.

One of the ways that RQM is like D&D (D20), and that hasn't been mentioned elsewhere, is that RQM has been produced under an OGL and has an SRD. This has obviously been copied from D20 and is an excellent idea.

Yep, it was certainly a helpful idea for me. It let me see up-front that I didn't like MRQ, and prevented me wasting any money on their product.

I kind of like the idea of removing the Resistance Table. I hate having to look up tables during a game, so the fewer the better.

I'm not keen on the Resistance Table either. I just use STATx5 rolls.

(But modify the stat by +/-1 per point below/above 10 of the opposing Stat/Potency/whatever, if necessary).

Which of course makes the numbers exactly the same as the Resistance Table...

However I did find it rather sad that RuneQuest 3 had very little to do with Runes. I created a modification to Sorcery where I had a Runic Lore skill. ...

I sympathize with that, and your solution to the problem sounds fine. If Mongoose had used some similar system, it would have been so much better. But they couldn't break out of the D&D-ish "grab stuff!" mind-set...

Yes, the way that Runes worked is a mistake. Making them physical tokens that could be taken is a mistake. Linking spells to certain runes is a mistake and the way that Gloranthan cults wotk with Runes is a mistake.

:confused: I'm not even sure what this means.

It means the Mongoose books have pictures of physical Runes on the covers.

And MRQs physical Runes are it's big mistake - a terrible mistake IMHO - which reveals Mongoose's D&D-style attitude.

Strange, I've been reading through RQM and I don't find it to be much like D&D... What about RQM do you guys find to be "D&D inspired"? How does it deviate so significantly from previous versions of Runequest? Were earlier versions of Runequest not based on the BRP system?

Objectively, MRQ is much more like BRP than it is like D&D. But the changes Mongoose made were in the direction of D&D. Not at all what old-time RQ fans hoped for in a long-awaited new release of "RuneQuest"!

Thalaba's 'beefs' sum it up well, though I now notice I've made some similar changes myself (1, 3, 6 in particular) - though I hope more sensitively than Mongoose. The one that really rubbed me up the wrong way about MRQ, though (even though I use a more D&D-like magic system!) was...

4. They tried to introduce a more obvious and direct relationship to runes through Rune Magic, which seemed somewhat ill thought out. This doesn't necessarily make the game more D&D-like though, I don't think.

Well, I think it does. It makes MRQ more D&D-like in attitude. (Much more so than any game calling itself RuneQuest should be). The contemptible "kill-things-and-take-their-stuff" D&D-style approach was built-in to the MRQ Rune Magic system. Instead of Runes being spiritual ideas your characters would strive for, oafish Mongoose made them physical objects you had to kill for and take. Yuk. :mad:

Yep, Mongoose missed the point alright. Their failure to even understand their error is emblazoned on the MRQ books covers! >:->

RQ:AiG may not have been perfect, but it was certainly no wargame. It would've been a much better RuneQuest than MRQ - which doesn't deserve the name, IMHO.

If no one else beats me to it I shall post it here at some point this weekend.

I posted it recently in another thread, here.

Do you mean RQ 4 or Mongoose RQ? I'd like to avoid any game influenced by D&D.

Mongoose RQ is the D&D-influenced one. It departs significantly from previous versions of RuneQuest - too much so, IMHO.

RQ4 - "RuneQuest - Adventures in Glorantha" (or RQ4:AiG) was a never-published version much more true to the RQ tradition. PDF copies of it are around, and it has good & interesting ideas, plus a fair number of creatures (with their SIZes).

Why not just allow a player to make as many defense rolls as he wants without a cumulative penalty?

What if they've got 100%+ Defence? Could you live with them successfully dodging virtually all the time?

As far as I remember, the RQ3 rule is a bit more complex than that:...

Not with the same weapon, unless they have 90+% attack....

Yes. I'm just making sure ShadowDragon knows there are possible problems, 'cos he may not want to get into those complexities at this stage...

I've never found this to be a problem.

...or maybe, like Thalaba, he won't worry about it!

...you get TWO combat actions a round (two of three from Dodge, Attack and Parry)...

A possible problem with that approach is that anyone can do two attacks whenever they like. (Typically, when they are in no danger of being attacked in return, or it suits them to ignore the danger).

I've not had occasion to convert from 3.x in practice. Base should definitely be in the formula, and you may well be right about Rank x5 coming out too low.

Does Base + Rank x10% seem better?

I suspect being ganged up on is bad enough that you don't really need any other penalty!

But infinite dodges is almost certainly too good. The -30% rule, as a side-effect, limits the number of parries/dodges per round, so I'd advise keeping that aspect of it (i.e. once per 30% skill).

However, my love was lost... ...in this instance, I think showing up with converted characters...would be easier.

If your heart's not in the system, forget it. I limped along for many unsatisfying years tweaking D&D - all to no avail. Only making the break to RQ/BRP finally did the trick.

Maybe you could run the converted characters as a "taster session" (or adventure, or campaign...). Perhaps on some strange (and perhaps impermanent) "otherworld". Might they stray, briefly, into the Land of Faerie? If they're ok with it, they'll find the whole world oddly 'different' when they get back... (Otherwise, I guess you'd have to revert to 4E. Sigh. If you can afford it...)

Characters will always be more vulnerable in BRP than in D&D. A lot will depend on what magic you make available to patch them up after any "accidents".

As a very rough rule of thumb, I'd say 5th level would be about 70% in main skills, i.e. 10% per level + 20%, perhaps?

Improvement over a campaign? How long is a piece of string?

You're on the frontier of knowledge with this though, so... Good Luck!