g33k

I wouldn't put Ars Magica on the list of "mostly" RQ-derived games... Clearly having character-advancement be by way of individual skills, that are individually improved, is entirely RQ-like! Similarly the broad use of a signle skills-mechanism, as opposed to different funky little subsystems (like when some "Thief Skills" were rolled percentile in AD&D). But ArM supposdly began life as the suite of D&D House Rules for one particular RPG-playing group. It's "wizards the way they are supposed to be" (in a contrast to D&D's adventure/experience model of wizards getting better... despite D&D wizards being the "learned sage in the tower" type of wizard).. Many spells are clearly just ported D&D spells, and "classes" are seen in the Magi/Companions/Grogs division, and the 15 "Arts" are more thematically-akin to AD&D "Schools/Spheres" of magic (Enchantment/ Illusion/ Evocation/ etc) than to anything RQish. It's true there are no "levels" per se, but ArM's d10+Stat+Skill is much closer, mechanically, to D&D's d20+StatModifier+Skill, than to the BRP-derived d% mechanics; ArM's pyramidal XP table is much more D&D-like than it is like a BRP skill-check system. It'd be hard to deny some RQ influence... but overall, I have to consider it more D&D-derived than RQ-derived... but of course, there's a tremendous amount of originality, too! 8^)

Well of course it's 2e... 1e had the older title, "Shūtur eli sharrī" and I don't think they have a clean scan of it. OCR left a very-partial document. Maybe it'll be a stretch goal, like the RQ1 PDF?

Ummm... correct me if I'm wrong, someone, but isn't "unholy abomination" sort of the starting-point for CoC? "It ain't CoC unless it's an unholy abomination... or something even worse..."

Particularly if there should happen to be an officially-licensed RPG out ... https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/products/#/universe/star-wars

I understand the next joint Chaosium/MoonDesign kickstarter will be a reprint of "Sha naqba īmuru" cast in Babylonian mud, hand-scribed using reed stylii.

Just wanted to say that I'm really enjoying this! (apologies to Iskallor -- & the forum in general -- if 3rd-party commentary like this is Just Not Done.... Mod/Admin please delete if so!)

That's a very good rule, which seems to take the best of both worlds. I like it a lot. Agreed! I allow unlimited tick-hunting until some pre-defined skill-level (generally either 50% or 75%); sometimes I allow 1-2 "core" skills unlimited improvement to 90%. Then it's like the above -- you need a tick to make the improvement-check, but there's generally far more ticks to choose among, than there are improvement-rolls available to check for improvement. I allow an extra tick for a crit or a fumble, and this CAN mean TWO rolls to improve a single skill; I've considered only letting those same 1-2 "core" skills have that double-tick option, but haven't implemented that. For Glorantha, these "special" skills obviously MUST be cult skills... This honestly is a bit more fiddly than I like, but at the same time it also IMHO/IME gives even more of that feel of "learning/growing from the experiences the character had" that was such a revelation to me back in 1980 when I first met the RQ rules (after level-based systems).

I read that to mean "the only stuff Chaosium is actually looking for is CoC scenarios, but we'll at least glance over other stuff to see if something catches our interest." To pull this thread back on-topic(ish)... what about new content (scenarios, whatever) for the RQClassic that was so successfully kickstarted? Sure, some of those folk are just getting the stuff for collectorism... But if even half of 'em are planning to play it, and were willing to pay $5 each, that'd make a decent incentive to make an adventure or even a small sequence... yes?

I like this! But I'd also use a rune affinity relating to the event that caused the god to bleed, or even to the being/weapon/etc causing it... I like this less-well... I prefer the character to be able to diversify by way of such items; so long as it isn't something forbidden by their own god, of course!

Remember that these are REPRINTS of already-complete projects. Scanning & OCRing, fixing typo's & OCRo's (is there a correct word for that??? if there wasn't, there is now!), doing layout in modern programs, etc. But none of the usual 3rd-party sources of delay -- waiting for drafts to complete, waiting for art, etc -- that are largely outside publisher control.

RQ6 has a minimalistic setting, as-needed for demonstrating principles of the game; it's non-Gloranthan & VERY minimal, and the system is essentially "setting-free" (or at least "setting-neutral"). Exactly what product do you mean by "RQ7"?

Huh. Somebody should definitely look into that! I got my books 5 hours ago (all except for Trollpak, of course, it won't arrive until after Darkness).

+1 for using characterization/RP to differentiate! OTOH, an admission is in order that the very structure of BRP seems to NOT support these sorts of things... I think of this REALLY as a "feature" rather than a "bug." It's a classical complaint against RQ, particularly at higher power-levels as multiple abilities exceed 90%, that characters begin to seem homogenous... the "primary" skill/skillset (favored weapons for the warrior types, climb/stealth/hide for the "rogue" sorts, etc) slows down in improvement, and the "secondaries" begin to catch up; then even the third-tier skills begin to ascend to the lofty domains! After a while, the clank-iest fighter and clumsiest spell-sage are only slightly less-stealthy than the Rogue; and the Rogue & spell-sage only slightly less-skilled with their swords than the clanky fighter. And so on... Why do I call this a "feature" rather than a "bug"? Because it "feels right," like that's how it (mostly) SHOULD be. Consider the "adventuring party" -- a party of armed to and beyond "normal military" standards, with additional "penetrate hard target" and "explore/evaluate unknown" specializations. The closest real-life analogues I envision are something in the "special forces" military/intelligence/CovertOps domains, and those guys ARE all exceptionally combat-ready, exceptionally stealthy, exceptionally good at climb/etc... 95% in the core skills of EVERY adventuring "character class". Sure, there's some "niche" but they are RARELY in-use compared to session-oriented RPG play: One guy might be the "best" demolitions guy on a SpecialOps team, but few of them will be less than competent at it, etc.

I have to agree that the big-pool-of-points character systems is yet another axis of design/style. I think "Champions" was the foundational game, in 1981? Or was TFT sufficiently big-pool-of-points-y to feel similar (I never played it, tho it was "on my radar")? The way "points" built everything -- from raw characteristics like Strength and Intelligence on to super-powers -- certainly felt unique the first time I met it in Champs! When you look at, a modern game -- say, for example, "Eclipse Phase" -- you point to the d% mechanics and skill-driven characters as "runequest-y" and the big-pool-of-points character-design as "champions-y". GURPS, I think, took a big piece of the HERO approach in how it evolved from TFT...

Hmmm. How about generalizing this way: "Evade" is an all-out "escape from the blow" effort, which nearly always leaves you at some sort of disadvantage. Usually, and by default, it leaves you "Prone;" the GM may call for a different disadvantage, if it seems apt to the situation, or even permit you to Evade without taking any disatvantage (e.g. when you can slam a heavy door in the attacker's face, why would you dive away from the attack, and let them walk through the open doorway to stab your prone body???), If you are in sufficiently-tight spaces (a shieldwall, an 18"wide passage, etc) you cannot Evade at all. "Using Acrobatics in place of Evade often allows the same defensive effects of an Evade, but without taking disadvantage. It is a more-trained skill, so you generally need a teacher to train you, and a studio (or dojo, etc) to practice. Also, using it in combat sometimes just isn't an option. It requires a completely free field of motion, so an attempt to roll or flip away from one opponent is liable to get you hit by another one, in a close-set melee, and tumbling straight down a narrow corridor away from a foe is the same as running straight away from them by any other means. You also need a relatively flat and unobstructed floor. Attempts to perform Acrobatics on a field of broken boulders, or upon a steep slope, tend to leave you Prone just like an Evade... and possibly injured, too!

Is there any sense of a RL publication/availability timeline, yet? "Late 2016," for example, or "22nd of January, 2017 at 3:55:22PM GMT, +/- 17 seconds"? And what about distribution/availability (for those not part of the Kickstarter)? Is it a "1-run & done" book (as-planned so far), or is it planned to go "into print" with new printings as stock runs out? Somewhere in between? e.g... "wait-and-see-what-the-demand-is," or "1-run, PDF thereafter, POD to fulfill latecomers' needs"? Will it wholesale through distribution channels onto FLGS shelves, or mostly be special-order only? Still hoping for a bit more info about content/etc... might a Table of Contents be available, for example? Also -- of course! -- I'm perfectly happy with a link/pointer, if this info is already available and I've just not found it; and, of course, some or all of this may simply not be available yet.

Nope, those are separate products! GtG is a standalone KS project; well-documented on MoonDesign & other sites, extensively discussed here on BRPCentral, YouTube'd, RPG.net'ed, etc... I missed out on the Kickstarter and the initial print-run, but I'm planning on getting one of the new sets. GS is a part of the 13AiG KickStarter; see: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/416625372/13th-age-in-glorantha/description and scroll 3-4 pages down. That has as much info as I've been able to find...

So, I've heard of "13th Age in Glorantha" (and applaud it, but the d20 family is not my mechanic of choice), and apparently there's also this thing called "The Gloranthan Sourcebook" -- all setting, no significant game-mechanics. So, Heroquest rules, any BRP variant, etc. Heck even a "Fate" engine, or "Glorantha Powered by the Apocalypse". Whatever... I think it's AMAZINGLY cool that Glorantha has so many live, active gamesystems driving play in that world, and I'd surely applaud more (e.g. the "joking" references above). My own system-of-choice is BRP, and probably (courtesy of the fully-funded-and-still-Stretching Kickstarter) RQ2/RQC; but whatever, YMMV & more power to ya if it does! HOWEVER... I'm having a hard time tracking down any hard data on this "Sourcebook:" thingamajig. There's a (very cursory!) outline on the KS page. There doesn't seem to be ANYTHING about it on the 13AiG website(!), or MoonDesign. Have I just rolled a "00" on my Skill:Google?

I plan to play it (emphatically so!). I already have one of the "Gloranthan Classics" (Griffin Mountain) & plan to get at least a couple more (and may get the 4th just for anal-retentive completionism), plus the unlocked "Apple Lane" & "Snakepipe Hollow" and maybe other stuff. I'm gonna play as much of the collected RQ2 Goodness as my group will tolerate, in all that. We also play other games, and we tend to vote on "next system / next gaming arc" -- usually switching up relatively often, sometimes because a GM says "Got this great idea I want to run..." sometimes because GM-burnout forces another person to run, sometimes because one player advocates strongly for a particular game-world or genre, etc etc etc.

Yeah. What it says in the Title: which of the YouTube vids RE the Guide shows it off to best advantage? Which is the best "persuader" RE the expense (since a re-print is apparently coming), if one has to "persuade" someone RE the expense...

I hope you've hidden the body(ies) well, my friend, because admitting to the crime before-the-fact plays REALLY poorly in front of juries...

Where do we best direct queries about the details of this KS and the stretch-goals? Stuff like the query from Falconer, above, RE "art-printed-onto-hardcover" vs "dustjacket-over-cloth"? Is it good here? Should we ask on G+? Glorantha.com? Or...?

waitwaitWHAT? I thought this was coming out under the "Chaosium" lable? But it's MD instead? I mean, I realize the whole Chaosium/MoonDesign/DesignMechanism triumvirate is becoming so convoluted and intertwined as to be closer to a single entity... but...

Well, there's this whole "New School" of dramatist/narrativist RPGs, usually giving large amounts of "auctorial control" (via "Plot Points" or similar mechanic) to the players; they are, IMHO, a sufficiently apples-and-oranges sort of thing to not be directly comparable to the "game-world-simulationist" RPGs such as RQ; some just prefer apples to oranges, or vice versa, or it depends on their mood... So, I don't feel the need to try to pick one kind as "better than" the other. I wrote my gaming group about the new RQ2-reprint:

But in terms of hours of work per dollar of return, some of their back catalog is a MUCH better bet (the the sense of ROI) than many/most "new title" options; I suspect tthis new "RQ Classic" (and a few others) will be such bets, and that they will only prioritize the "best bet" parts of the back catalog in the coming year or two, alongside a comparable number of new titles; then some other OOP titles dribbling out over the course of a few years, in conjunction with mostly-new stuff, and some of the old titles probably languishing without ever getting a single man-hour, PDF-ism, or POD offering...