Thaz

It is indeed a masterwork and a brilliant concept.

BwT may have written something on this in an adventure which features the dead remains of a long forgotten Goddess. Coming to a Chaosium book near you.... When it's Ready. And if.

I've played it. It was a great evenings play. I am of course biased as part of Bwt but we really had fun.

Shire Horse, me in full plate (and heavy duty plate at that) vs a weighed strawbale wearing an old breast plate. Really wasn't that big an impact. Now I totaly wouldn't want to be jumping hedges and so on but that's more riding in armour than lance use. And we're not talking about that in RQG are we? Where they well have either saddles appropriate or striupps. Img they have stirrups. Yes it's not earth bronze age tech but is glorantha where mounted troops are a huge thing. So someone invented stirrups early. No bigge. Greatswords. Now we're talking...

I've done it myself with a regular saddle. Smashed targets etc. Yes I had stirrups but I i wasn't especially using them... Ie not standing up into the blow or anything. Tbh I'd be okay doing it bareback without stirrups. It's more general battlefield mobility saddle and stirrups are good for. Napoleon era cav used regular saddles even lancers. There are a lot of myths regarding lance use in combat. ((for background I once commanded a mixed arms medieval reenactment group that included cav. We did a lot of trials prepping for joust displays etc ))

This is incorrect, on many levels. You don't need much of a saddle really. A basic one is fine. You don't need stirrups. Also there hasn't been any discussion or description of saddles in RQG AFAIK.

Exactly. There is nothing particularly sacred about the the 'Tech Tree' as developed in Europe or China. There is no reason at all why the Gods could not have handed Pentians Stirrups for example. There is nothing especially Iron age about them. Bronze makes perfectly good horseshoes, stirrups and indeed canon for example. There are bronze razors out there that still hold a great edge. We just dont know how they were made...

Except it doesn't. 1 handed lance use before stirrups just requires the appropriate saddle.

Yup. 🙂

Personally I think this is 'over thinking' at its highest. Spear Long (1H) is Lance. I think the issue for me is the description of Lance is wrong (IMG) as it's too long. It's just a big spear. We're not playing Pendragon and practical combat lances were just that. Drop the Lance to 3m or less and it all works out. Use it one handed and you loose a chunk of base skill as it's unwieldy (base skill is 5 rather than 15). So typically used 2 Handed on foot. Which is how I've always used and fought against larger spears/pole weapons. I'll skip over the stirrup argument but note with the appropriate saddle you don't need stirrups to use a lance one handed. Practical Combat Lances were not that big outside of Jousting.

Whereas getting past the point and so on is totally a thing, as is shortening grip and stabbing the cheeky git trying it on you this gets to tweaking the rules of combat well past what any version of RQ attempts. This has been a debate forever and I recall rules for this back in White Dwarf back in the RQ2&3 days :- Do you really want that level of complexity in your game? I'm currently playing/Gming in two rather different gritty bloody lethal RPG's. RQG and The Witcher TTRPG. Last Sunday I had the pleasure of playing in the two back to back and as chance would have it we had two major fights in both games (previous Witcher session was combat free as was RQG iirc, anyways...). The Witcher TTRPG is based on the same core rules as Cyberpunk. It's not Rolemaster but there was a lot of detailed combat description, feints, parrys and special moves, fair few perks and combat traits. My grubby vile mannered dwarf laid waste taking out three bandits while the rest of the party got two. The fight took all afternoon to run. Left the healer priest twiddling her thumbs a bit as she has post combat healing and doctoring rather than instant heals. It was very detailed and cinematic and speaking as a sometime HEMA/Re-enactment type and instructor pretty accurate (unlike the armour and weapon descriptions in the game which set my teeth on edge). There was always the chance of one of us going down with crippling injuries. The evenings RQG game had a similar fight (one big scary ass monster, a Walktapus, hitting our camp during the night while most of the party were asleep). The fight was smooth, slick and easy. Once a group gets the hang of what options there are and to roll their hits, have their damage and hit location dice to hand RQG (like it's ancestors) is pretty smooth and yet realistic enough not upset the HEMA type in me. It was fast, nasty and we almost lost two established player characters except for the swift application of Rune Magic and other healing from our earth healer type. If my Stormbull hadn't made his scan roll on watch and made good use of Impede Chaos the party could easily have been toast. The two experiences were night and day and yet both GM's are excellent and have good command of the rules. Both groups had a similar mix of new and verteran players. yes we can make the game more crunchy but there will be a price to pay for that. I like the current balance. Mess with it to suit your table 🙂

Already did

Sorry reading this again. If you are writing now :- No contest. The old time line is history. Write for the new stuff.

Th Grand Campaign is coming. To be honest now It might be best to play from 1611 and up to the dragon rise and then your players are all set for the rise of Argrath. Or possibly their kids in true Pendragon style

Why not just play through with the events of your adventures and King of Sartar as your timeline? Yes you players may alter established events...but that's cool .

I happen to know the Great Sartar Campaign is currently being worked on by Jeff. 😉 However I have run both rq3 in the Classic period 1610 ish and new RQC 1625. Both are cool. I am currently GMing one campaign set in 1627 (Storm and about to enter 1628), playing in another exactly the same and alsoplaying in one set in 1610(?) but using RQG rules . So I get to have my cakes and eat them too.

I've run and played both. And in fact still am. 😄 Why not both?

Your one stop shop is The Glorantha Sourcebook. If you already have a rules set and background material this pulls it all together. King of Sartar is another excellent source that gives you a real flavour. King of Dragon Pass computer game is also excellent resource to understand the setting. It's wiki is a great source of Lore as well even if you don't get the game. If you dont have a rules set then yes totally buy the RQG Slipcase set.

For entirely selfish reasons :- Wooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooot.

MGF is cool but 3 seems a lot. 2 fine. Mind you Shaman Rune Priest is a thing so hey 3 initiates maybe not so bad

I really like this take. I hate talking about Canon because it feels like I'm setting out to piss someone off. Normally Jane.

I concur. Although if someone can summon a Air Elemental in a hurry... (I'm not familiar with the pregens for reasons I've muttered about before)

I think it depends on your Style and wants. TSR gives you a chunk of the Grazelands an area not previously much detailed. It gives you some more on Clearwine and Lekia's court and Clearwine Earth Temple stuff. A chunk on Beast Valley. PP is much more Sartar based. As such it fits nicely in with the GM's Pack and the freebie adventures already out. There's a good plot hook to get players out from Colymar lands in TSR to the adventure of the same name and my players certainly jumped from there straight into some of the other seamlessly (oh how I laughed). But for some it might be more of stretch. Half my group were Grazelanders so this was a must have for me. PP is much more Sartar based and as such if your group are from there maybe a better fit? If you've got a bunch of Praxians not so much. I'm biased as I wrote some of PP so I'd say get that 😉

Gotta say the art is amazing. Well done all!

Thanks for the review 🙂