frogspawner

Sounds like a good implementation. Probably too compatible with pre-existing versions for them to use in HQ2, though... To play Glorantha, I'd use BRP with my usual simple options (and a few house rules). Ignoring MRQ of course. For those among us who might want to use Mongoose Glorantha material, what else (aside from Runes!) is there in MRQ stuff that needs conversion for use with BRP?

Really? Then I'm afraid you realize wrong. My previous postings have said how the new idea of physical runes could have a place in Glorantha - if done properly. Rules shouldn't force such behaviour though. MRQ does.

Yes, that fixes the physical Runes problem nicely... ...so long as ( is reserved for extra-special occasions!

No. The point in bold breaks Glorantha by turning it into just another D&D-style "kill things and their stuff" setting (or can do, if Runes are anything other than extremely rare). Yes. Rules supporting that are necessary to allow GMs to play their Glorantha without Runes being common, if they wish.

Which reminds me - that single copy of BRP looked awfully lonely on my FLGS's shelf, on it's own amongst the many dark-spined sets of books from other publishers. Can anyone tell me again why Chaosium don't just send out a handful of related monographs with each one, to keep it company...?

Hmm, oh yeah. Perfect sense. So, bows should be for a certain STR just like armour is for a certain SIZ. Right? [Actually, I think the bows should be usable only by those of that STR or greater (but not do any greater damage). Like Odysseus' bow, which only he could draw (unless Heracles had happened to find it, I guess!)] Sorry to have to tell you though, Rod - quoting yourself is not 'cool'... ... BUT being able to claim the tall guy at the top of every forum-page is yourself - now, that is cool!

Ummm - but if the boxer came up against the samurai, who would your money be on? For successful Martial Arts with whatever weapon, rather than extra (double) damage, I give an extra attack. How's that?

Sorry, but this is the same as the "kill them and take their stuff" scenario which should be avoided. Fine narrative, but there's nothing to stop some brigand killing the old thane and taking the Rune - if it's an object - and then having just the same chance as the rightful heir to attune it. Doesn't seem right. Now if, as I'd say, the Rune/crystal had been absorbed into the thane's own bloodstream, then maybe someone of his own bloodline might get a chance to inherit it, if voluntarily given...? Nah, they could be un-attuned voluntarily (except cursed ones...). You could only have one, though, IIRC. Personally, I'd prefer only truly rare/exceptional circumstances to allow physical Runes to manifest. Dreadful news. They seem intent on introducing differences for the sake of it (or, rather, for the sake of making a deliberate break from older material. To improve sales of their new products, a cynical person might think... ) "A triumph of hope over experience" is the phrase, I'm afraid, Rosie. I suggest we do what we can to fix the mess Mongoose/GS have already made (and I think we're close, if not there already!) and worry about fixing whatever further Glorantha-breaking nonsense they come out with if/when it happens.

Isn't it enough to assume that your particular bow has a poundage that's sufficient to give you your damage bonus? I know you don't just pick up any old bow and shoot, but have to find one that's got the right "pull" for you...

And I rate MA as "very hard", naturally! BTW - does anyone use vanilla BRP?

My houserule is, in addition to skills of normal difficulty to learn (+3/+d6 per increase), some are easy to learn (+4/+d6+1), some hard (+2/+d6-1) and some very hard (+1/+d6-2).

Aha! But that's part of the beauty of it! This explains why physical runes are prevalent in 2nd Age Glorantha, but (virtually) unheard-of in the 3rd Age... As time goes by, the only way to get/integrate/attune a Rune is by proxy - through initiation into Rune cults (to the gods of which we can assume the Rune-integrated souls would pass, after death). Indeed. I'd take the view that physical Runes are the equivalent of RQ2 crystals - the crystallized blood of the gods. The parallel with oil (being organically-derived) gets even closer!

OK, for the first time in ages, I've been back to the MRQ Forum, to mine it for useful stuff. The major problem, as I see it, with Physical Runes was the "kill someone and take their stuff" effect it produced - Gloranthan-style ransoming was out the window, since you had to kill a Rune-integrated person to get their Rune, making it all too d&d-ish. The conclusion of a debate on Runes was this... I think the "a Rune becomes part of the Integrator, and dies with them" approach solves this problem neatly (for scenarios that aren't written on a premise fundamentally contravening this principle).

Your Glorantha reflection sounds more recognizable as the Glorantha we knew of old than current products under that trademark.

Mmm, spooky. Must be Fate at work... I'm just saying a 'Carrot' mechanism is preferable to a 'Stick'. (I've previously stated my personality traits mechanic, which I like to think is quite 'light touch', in another thread). I'm reminded the potential to reward role-playing was one of the (very few) advantages I noticed the MRQ SRD had over RQ/BRP. (Again, though, it's a good idea implemented clumsily. Subjective handouts by the GM are too D&D-like, too easy to degrade into "you killed X kobolds, so you get Y experience pioints... I mean Improvement Rolls"). Another subject for this thread! Could you please explain to me the difference between 'easy-access recharge' and plain old re-usable Rune/Divine magic?

How magic-rich you play it is a campaign decision, not necessarily dependent on the rules. True, published adventures/etc did seem to give too many spells - for my taste, anyway (but it's easier to cross stuff out than add it in...). I don't think the rules should prevent players doing things, even uncharacteristic things. Rather, I'd say there should be a mechaism to reward actions that are in-keeping with their religion (i.e 'runic' in this case). Interesting. What discount, exactly?

And seeing BRP & MRQ converge would not displease me - so long as MRQ moved most! Hmmm... But a guy's gotta eat. Let's just do what we can to get it right.

Fluff is all. I'd probably just change the 'crunch' anyway - but a good story fragment transcends systems and inspires better mechanisms.

Well, he said won't say anything, rather than can't. But my previous post crossed with his, and since he now has shared some thoughts after all, I was obviously being overly harsh. <insert excuse about being so wound up by physical runes here> Sorry Mr Whitaker. Thanks for your efforts on behalf of all Glorantha fans.

Mr Sprange is too late - we've already 'admitted' that for him. He's a D&D man - and, as has been said by others, it shows. Mr Stafford may not be 'out of touch' with the Glorantha he invented all those years ago - and then gave to us, as he said - but what I suggested was that he appears to have lost the 'feeling' for it. (The bolt-on cults he invented for HeroWars were just daft, IMO). It's more a case of 'His Glorantha Will Vary'. Clearly he wants to make money from it. (BTW, if you really find it incredible anyone could hold such opinions, then your imagination may be wearing out...) Yet I did get that feeling. Just paranoia - probably! Yes, I'm sure an aim was to make Runes into mere 'treasure' - something D&D-ers can understand. Pity. This forum is for sharing ideas. Not just advertising your product.

New thread for this debate: How to fix Mongoose RuneQuest/Glorantha

<Summarized/Continued from the "Chaosium Supporting BRP" thread...>

Yes, I got that. You do yourself a disservice. Seems like you've more feeling for Glorantha than Sprange (and perhaps Stafford, these days...) Absolutely! Yes. So much so, I couldn't help the nagging feeling that was the deliberate aim. They're not unsalvageable. Back when I visited the MRQ Forum, I spent lots of time suggesting tweaks/interpretations for the 'physical runes' rules that could have made them Glorantha-compatible. What are yours? (Perhaps we should have a new thread for that...).

Maybe I got the "handfuls of d6's"-kick out of my system back in the days spent playing Tunnels & Trolls. PS: Or maybe not - Fireball-type spells still give a buzz...

Sounds good. I use the straight D&D3.x bonuses, i.e. the same as your 11+ formula (if rounded down) - but continued down below 10. That may be a bit harsh (especially on any STR 9-ers!) considering there are also minimum STRs for weapons (is that why you'd cut it off at 10?). But I say - what the heck.