frogspawner

New is usually better, but not necessarily. 80% of MRQ is newer-but-not-better than old BRP versions. Thankfully some details are actual improvements.

Assertion, not evidence. I'd say that 90% of MRQ was worse than the pre-existing RQ versions. The only good things in MRQ were the ideas of: (1) a mechanism to reward roleplay; (2) dropping strike-ranks; and (3) not having to track both Total HPs and HP-per-location. But the actual implementations of even those ideas were bad.

You missed my point. As long as the old-schoolers sleep with their dusty old books like teddy bears (ahem, I have a whole collection of RQ3 and CoC books on my nightstand ) and encourage newbies to buy them, publishers will be a bit afraid to invest in D100/RQ/non-D&D. Companies make games because they think they'll sell, and if they see fans of classic games always saying "I'll stick to the old version, nothing can be better." where do you think they'll put with their money? And you will not see better versions if the money stays away - sad but true.

I didn't miss your point. Having lost that one, you are just trying to make another. But I cannot agree with the view that we should buy bad product from Mongoose (or anyone) in the hope they will then make enough money to publish better stuff later!

It works like this: first someone publishes a good product - then customers buy it.

I have seen the MRQ SRD, and so I will not be buying Mongoose's stuff - it is sub-standard.

But I have bought BRP - and soon I will have bought it three times!

Hound of Tindalos: Please do not think we in the BRP/RQ community are all argumentative so-and-so's! But I just can't let this guy's untruths go unchallenged. (When he first came to this forum - from the MRQ one - he described this place as "too civilized", btw !)

Cool! Send in your RQ3 Rune Lord with Protection 4 against my RQ3 Humakti with Bladesharp 12 and Parry 12, and let's have his arms insignificantly lopped off.

'Insignificant' to convert. If you want to - we don't all want to power-game like that...

As for what is outdated and what is out of fashion, well, I'll explain my idea: <SNIP>

You seemed to be equating old with bad and new with good - which is clearly wrong.

When will we old-schoolers learn that suggesting people to get oop versions of games we like instead of the supported ones is actually a nail in the coffin for our beloved game systems?

When there's an in-print version that's better than the oop versions (or even just as good as...)

Ehm, in fact I wanted to suggest MRQ but it is terribly unpopular on this forum.

And with reason - MRQ isn't as good as true RQ/BRP.

The only advantage MRQ had over true RQ was that the Mongoose version was in print. Thankfully, with the arrival of BRP, that's gone!

But, great though the new BRP book is, it doesn't have everything you'd need to start a fantasy campaign (treasure, religions), has plenty that's irrelevant (modern, supers, futuristic), and has a lot of options (which are initially confusing for a beginner).

Hound of Tindalos: Buy RQ2 - you won't regret it! It's not hard to find on e-bay, and should only cost you about 10 quid (20 dollars?). Then if you have any cash left over, buy BRP - and update any rules you think need it.

- No Power Points. This Temporary POW stuff can give you a big headache.

- SIZ and INT rolled on 3d6 (no longer used in any BRP game)

- skill increments in 5% steps only

- artificial spell limits (Protection 4 is the top, even for the Ultra-High-Priest)

- incompatible values for armors (incompatible with BRP1 I mean)

- no ENC or fatigue option

Insignificant differences. Plus RQ2/3 do have an ENC system, btw. (And although Fatigue didn't come until RQ3, nobody used/uses it anyway!)

RQ2 is best. Plus it's Apple Lane supplement if you can get it - doesn't everyone start in the Rainbow Mounds?

Plus make one SAN roll for endorsing Ken St.André, you Tunneling Troll

Hey! I cut my teeth on Tunnels & Trolls - I might still be playing it now, if I hadn't run out of six-sided dice...

(Mind you, if it hadn't been for T&T, I might've made the investment in Original D&D stuff - and now be reaping a tidy little profit! So Boo! to you, KStA! :mad:)

I assume Ken St. Andre did it right in those days.

I'm not so sure - people often mention something that's "St.Andre's Fault".

This one. Plus (or minus) any applicable damage bonus, rolled.

YES! That's just the one I was hoping for (though trying not to lead the witness). Thanks yet again, Mr.D!

...my first question is, just where in the hell does one start? What book would you recommend to a first time RQ user?

Oops! Just realized I didn't answer the first question...

Personally, if you want to get into RuneQuest quickly, I'd pick up a copy of RQ2 from eBay...

Yes, seconded! RQ2 is absolutely the right book to start with. Preferably, get the boxed version, which also includes Apple Lane (classic beginner scenarios) and Fangs (stock monsters & characters).)

It scores over RQ3 by having nice extras (atmosphere, treasure tables, religious write-ups, chaotic features, etc) all in there.

Even with Jason's clarification, I still don't read it that way. You would still add in the MA damage. Or, perhaps the MA damage should be rolled, as with the characters Damage Bonus.

Yes, I'd prefer it to be that way, too, but I'm still not clear about it, even after Mr D's help.

Let's use a simple example so I might be able to understand: A dagger (d4, Impaling) does a critical hit which is also a success for Martial Arts(dagger) (and let's assume the attacker has no damage bonus, and the target is armoured).

Is the damage...

A: 4 (max rollable for crit only)

B: 4 + d4 (max rollable for crit plus rolled MA bonus)

C: 4 + 4 (max rollable for crit plus max MA bonus)

...?

What's the difference between 2nd and 3rd age?

About 500 years.

Seriously, 3rd age is the original RQ setting - on the world of Glorantha, about the year 1600, usually in and around the famous Dragon Pass and/or the Prax desert and the city of Pavis, typically featuring heroic rebels struggling against the mighty Lunar Empire. This is the setting that made RQ great.

2nd age, set in the doomed past of Glorantha about the year 1100 before everyone was eaten by dragons and other disasters, is a new invention, usually involving struggles against the misguided God Learners, who sought to reduce nature and myth to simple game-like principles they selfishly manipulate. This is the setting that Mongoose publishing hope will make them money. I'm not keen.

MRQ is called RuneQuest but isn't as good, having been spoiled by poor design, IMHO - and is more like D&D in style. BRP is much better - more like true RuneQuest (although Chaosium have lost the RQ name, due to legal shenanagins).

Non-Martial Arts Critical: Do max rolled damage (1D8+1 = 9, frex) plus normal rolled damage bonus, bypassing all armor. If your target is unarmored, you have the option of doing Special Damage instead (ie an Impaling Weapon rolls damage twice, plus once rolled damage bonus).

Yep (but the special damage v unarmoured is at GM discretion).

Martial Arts Critical: ... You could however play it that you do Max Weapon Damage + Rolled Martial Arts Damage + Rolled Damage Bonus, all bypassing armor...

Yes, I would argue that! But it seems MA doesn't benefit criticals...

You roll your damage normally as if you'd scored a critical success.

But, if you score a critical success, you don't "roll" your damage (normally)!

OK, though, I hear what you're saying - it's like I suspected at the start: Martial Arts give no benefit to critical hits. Which seems odd

I liked the old version, that gave you -5% to your skill per stat point below the requirements you have.

Well I like this new version better - i.e. the under-statted have to roll at half skill.

(But this is a debate for the Difficulty Modifiers thread... )

I'm a bit surprised it's 2 to 1 FOR hit locations. Not that every player of the game is here, but still.

I think the poll is poorly worded. Even those of us who usually don't use Hit Locs, but only for Major Wounds and such, are having to vote FOR.

Also, the default determination seems random. Just roll some dice, it's where you happen to hit. Like a fighter has no real control. Then if you want to take fighter choice/aiming into consideration, it's yet another level of modifiers, debates, blah blah blah. All this so a character can lose an arm against their will. Pass.

No need for debate - there is a spot rule for aiming: make a difficult (half-chance) attack roll, and hit the location you choose.

Thanks for the (speedy) clarifications!

The extra damage from martial arts should be added to critical hits, or armor is ignored (just as it is with normal criticals).

But... "or"? Sorry, I'm still not quite clear on this. Shouldn't that be "extra damage and armour is ignored"?

There should be a note somewhere (it might have gotten left out inadvertently) stating that using a weapon you don't have the relevant STR/DEX requirements for is Difficult (1/2 skill chance). It's in the listing for Shields (on page 264) but is missing for some reason on page 257.

Brill! Whether or not the errant note turns up, that's exactly what it should be! Thanks again.

I would read it as "normal for Martial arts", i.e. with an additional die. It says "as above", after all.

Yes, perhaps so. It says "damage is rolled normally", but you wouldn't roll damage for a regular critical anyway. (No offence, but I was hoping for a more authoritative answer, though... ...Mr. D?)

One interesting question is: criticals allow to choose between max damage and special effect, i.e. for a dagger it is eiter 2d4 through armor or 4 through armor.

Ah, but that's only against unarmoured opponents (and even then the option to do a special effect instead is at GM discretion).

What happens with martial arts? Do you get to choose between 3d4 and 1d4+4 (or even 8?)

I'm not yet totally convinced that Martial Arts add to Criticals at all.

But I'm glad you agree the wording is somewhat less than unequivocal. For the benefit of those yet to receive their copy, here're the relevant words about Martial Arts...

"SUCCESS: If the rolled result is less than the skill rating in both Martial Arts and the appropriate combat skill, roll for base damage twice and total the result. Your character’s damage bonus is never doubled.

SPECIAL: As above. If the combat roll is a special success, the additional base damage roll is added to the effects of the special hit, if any.

CRITICAL: As above. If the combat roll is a critical success, any armor possessed by the target is ignored, and damage is rolled normally."

(Re.: Apparent Total Inability to use weapons with less than the required STR/DEX)

I believe so. IIRC, that's how Stormbringer handled it.

Thanks. But... yuk!

Similarly, I can't seem to find any reference to penalties for not having the required STR/DEX for a particular weapon. So is a character with less than the stated stats simply unable to wield that type of weapon?

Am I right in my reading of the BRP rules for these? Successful Martial Arts adds an extra damage roll to normal hits and specials, but gives no benefit at all to criticals?

E.g. Daggers (d4,Impaling) would (when the attack roll is also an MA success of any degree) do 2d4 on a normal hit, 3d4 on a special hit but just 4hp (through) on a critical (which would happen anyway, without MA(dagger) skill)?

I personally like the ease of the multipliers than the fractional ones, saving the latter solely for gear or weather conditions.

... and that's good enough for me.

OK, compared with CoC, I guess it's a Yes.

Sorry, but your poll is poo.

I like Hit Locations - but I'm not using them because they entail time-consuming extra admin. Except, I am using them on my variant Major Wounds table, of course. I also am not a Gorp. How should I vote?

There is a Spot Rule for Mass Combat in BRP, but it just suggests a couple of very abstracted ways to handle it.

Dragon Pass is a great idea for wide-ranging large scale engagements lasting days or weeks; for individual battles I'd use a variant of the "Hordes of the things" tabletop rules (itself a variant of DBA); for anything less - well, so long as you roll fast and the troops are pretty homogenous, use BRP...

I would handle it something like this:

You are trying to pick a lock built by a Master Locksmith with 120% skill? That's a minus 20% to your skill.

Oh, you are using a bent paperclip instead of proper tools? That's makes the task Hard; roll against 1/2 skill.

Sadly, that's almost the exact opposite way around from an example given in the BRP book! Yes, it's a tricky call.

We only subtract and add the following modifiers: +-20/40/60%.

Multiplier we consider as not very intuitive. IMO its more linear and intuitive to calculate a certain chance of success in adding a simple +-20% to say 77 than to double or to halve it. (doubling or halving additionally to beeing not intuitive produce sometimes odd results with high numbers)

Fair enough. But personally I find the opposite - multipliers are easy (factors of 2 I can manage!), but +/- modifiers muck up the critical/special/fumble values.

Character should matter. Memorable personalities are what it's all about - the system should stay in the background. You can't control their characters' behaviour (though it could be strongly suggested with clear-cut Glorantha-like cult roles). So one or two utterly bad bad guys should feature.

I suggest Broo - played really over-the-top and gross, defiling anything they can get hold of. These players will probably want to kill things and take their gold. Something that vile clearly must be killed - so that should make them happy. But then they'll find they can't take the gold without becoming diseased - what a dilemma!

Difficulty Modifiers - The amount a skill’s chance is adjusted by, based on the circumstances surrounding its use. (Followed by fractional adjustments.)

Hi. Personally, I'd just use the 'Difficulty Modifiers' variety (for which the 'fractions' are really simple: either x2, x1/2 - or Auto-succeed/Auto-fail!).

The +X% 'Modifiers' seem too fiddly to me. I'd only use them when some other rule/spell insisted on it.

The bestiary includes a 'Brontosaur' as any Dinosaur geek knows there was no such thing...

Or move it from the "Natural Animals" section into "Fantasy Creatures", because there are great herds of the darned things on certain fantasy worlds...

RoleMaster had a good long list of magical herbs (including weird insect-juices etc) which might be helpful for a start.

But lists define what is possible and what is not, setting limits. It would be nicer if The Green's variety of herbs was limitless and unknown/unknowable. Maybe you could develop a series of tables for the properties of herbs/etc that might be found...?

Sweet!!

Don't get too excited, it's just Spirit Combat renamed. I may have to do some House Rules to beef it up a bit...