drablak

Armor p.108 and hit location table p.127. Armor is not often used, and normally you roll LUCK to see if the armor is hit, but there is an optional rule to roll 1d20 for hit location.

Do you know if it'll work on a Mac?

Yes I voted for that as well (GM book, etc.), but I'm not buying anything more until I'm convinced I'll actually play the game. It's my hope that once the current writing marathon they're doing leaves them more free time they can spend some of it on things to help newcomers.

Not on the list but I'd really like Jason (or someone else) to put some effort on answering the many questions still unanswered.

That's my hope as well. I said I would come back to it when things have settled a bit.

Speaking only for myself here (obviously) but I found the learning curve quite steep. It really depends if you've played another version of RQ before or not. In my case I had no prior experience in any version. I was very enthusiastic about this edition. It looks great and is a joy to read. The problem is that there are a lot of moving parts and many details don't quite fit. This is were prior experience helps. Those who played other editions gloss over the copy-paste errors (one part not exactly saying the same thing as another part) or the unclear bits and fill the gaps with their own past experience, including with house rules (that they sometimes forget are house rules). Another issue for me is that there are 3 magic systems, compounded by the fact everyone has magic in Glorantha. Magic is prevalent and makes a huge difference in battle. Browsing this forum you'll encounter people mentioning how you never go into battle without casting magic. Not only the players, but the opposition also cast magic before going into battle (I mean the troll too). All that means that you have to know the magic systems very well as there are "killer" combinations. This adds to the learning curve. Finally, another issue that I had is that the "power level" of this new edition is different than previous editions. While it's not too hard to convert adventures modules from previous edition mechanically, it's not as easy to tweak them for the power level of a RQG group of players as opposed to previous editions' groups. Prior experience with running RQ also helps here, but for a new-to-RQ GM it's touchy. Bottom line in my case is that I decided to put it aside until more updated material and play examples (or the GM handbook) are available. A few threads illustrating these issues:

I've never played 5e, but back in the days in AD&D we played that if you rolled '1' (I think they call that Nat1 now?), you then rolled 4D6 and if you rolled under your DEX you were ok (no fumble). With a Nat20 you had to reroll 1D20 and if that second roll was a hit (vs AC) then you had a critical. So a Nat20 was always a hit, but only a crit if your second d20 also hit.

They weren't in the core books if that's what you mean, but there were various tables in the Dragon magazines (official TSR magazine), and also in White Dwarf magazines. We've played AD&D with crits and fumbles back in the 80's.

There were criticals and fumbles in AD&D, it's not something 5E got from RQ.

And don't forget you had to roll a "Know Spell" to see if you understood a spell you were trying to learn.

Not me. I've put it aside until I can make more sense of it. Looks like a great game though.

Doesn't that fall under the phase 2 rules? That's another confusing part (for me).

By the same token, why would anyone be constrained by what they stated in their SOI then, or do you let people change their minds? That's a question I had regarding SOI some time ago, because I think the order that people state their SOI matters.

A thread which needs more attention from Chaosium also, both in answering the questions, but also in collecting all the Q/A somewhere.

As a physicist it's quite entertaining to see mentions of Quantum Mechanics in a thread about a bronze age RPG! As a GM new to RQ in general (no prior experience with RQ2 or RQ3, etc.) and RQG in particular (meaning these are the only rules that I have), threads like this made me put RQG aside until some of this is explained better. I really think a couple of examples of play, designed to illustrate the designers' intentions with regards to things like those discussed here, would go a long way in making this easier on new players/GMs like me.

That makes sense. As long as everyone is buying in that's cool. 👍 My players and I are a bit different I guess. We see the merging of similar skills as a positive thing (even for our various RL expertises).

It's all good, everyone sets its own degree of details in the skills. I understand you have personal knowledge of these skills, but I'm wondering if you extend those same levels of details in other skills? Sometimes our own knowledge of a specific skill blurs the line for that skill in regards to other skills. For instance, since you differentiate Motorcycle from 4-wheeled vehicles, do you also differentiate shotguns from rifles? Do you differentiate organic chemistry from biochemistry? Do you have Stealth/move silently from Stealth/hide in shadows? History by periods? Just curious.

I also agree with this and with what klecser said above. In a skill based system, grouping skills where it makes sense is a good idea. Sure, in real life there are differences, but is it necessary to go into such details in the game?

The additional information in the Keeper handbook is this: So generally when the mythos creature has more than one attack it will be outnumbered less easily.

(So klecser beat me to it! ) I think it's about double in size. A lot of the information about locations have been corrected/improved. It's been updated to 7th edition, of course, with small notes on running it with Pulp. There are more information for the keeper, there are clue diagrams for instance. They also added a scenario zero, which happens a few years before the New-York start and which gives a tie in for the characters with Jackson Elias. There are a couple of videos where the differences are explained.

The rules mention movement rates in metres not in terms of 'hexes' or 'squares,' so we use those rates and translate that depending on the scale we use. When we use miniatures, we place them on a hex mat like Styopa showed, or more often we use tiles for corridors and rooms. These have a scale, for example the corridor is 3 metres wide and 20 metres long. I'm guessing Styopa uses 1m hexes. We simply approximate how much to move the miniature on the tiles/mat depending on the move the character makes. In our games minis don't have to be exactly in a hex or a square, and are not constrained to moving within those hexes/squares. And as Womble mentioned facing and such is visible from the way the mini is placed.

Yes, this illustrate very well how I felt trying to start a RQG game from scratch (with no prior RQ experience), and having mostly older scenarios that were made for a different difficulty level. I've put aside trying for now, waiting for more updated/new scenarios and for the GM's guide, but this thread is very interesting.

The credits mention "Images from Editions Sans Détour" if that's what you're looking for.

Yes that's what he said. I just checked all my d10's and of the 42 I have (ok, the 42 that I found), 41 "do this", meaning opposite sides add up to 9. The only exception is my d10 from the RuneQuest set from Q-Workshop, for which opposite sides add up to 11 instead. The thing concerning the meaning of the '0' on the die is that, however you read the dice when you're using them, the sum of opposite sides, to be constant, needs to treat the '0' side differently: On the 'regular' dice, '9' is opposed to '0', adding up to 9 if you read '0' as '0' On the Q-Workshop die, '1' is opposed to '0', adding up to 11 if you read '0' as '10' Again, "reading" in this case of adding opposite sides, not the way you read the dice when you play. Just for the purpose of adding up opposite sides to a constant number.