Runequest 3, house rules, Borderlands and questions

[Atgxtg]

22 hours ago, soltakss said:

I would use RQG rather than RQ3 personally, and I say that as a massive fan of RQ3.

Yeah, but as you've admitted you still used the skills over 100% reducing the opponent's skill rule from RQ2 in your RQ3 games. So I think you were probably an easier convert to RQG than the typical "Massive fan of RQ3", as your RQ3 was always more of a RQ2-3 hybrid.

To me the pages and pages of clarification in the RQG rules thread to clarify how all the changes to the way the core game mechanics now work (for example the way two weapons now work, the different in critical and special chances for no real reason) is a big enough turn off to avoid RQG and either use RQ3 or RQ2, possibly porting over the Pendragon based inspiration rules and the easier rune magic use and recovery rules from RQG.

 

 

[Bill the barbarian]

On 11/10/2019 at 11:21 AM, weasel fierce said:

* I am leaning towards Runequest 3 since I feel it fits the best balance of things I want (robust rules without too many options to overwhelm the group, multiple character creation options, rules for a ton of critters and gods etc.). It's also the one I am the most comfortable with, and since I'll be running it for a fairly large group, that's going to be important. 

I never looked at this in the depth I should have (time was not permitting until now) but the next paragraph explains why I take a longer look at your comments.

14 hours ago, Crel said:

@weasel fierce My old RQ3 game didn't really use much Rune magic—I was a sorcerer-knight, and we had a couple other sorcerers and a shaman for support, plus one lonely theist—but I'd say the play experience of using Rune points is really fun. It's both strong and flexible. However, I do agree that something a bit more slow and granular than RQG would best fit my taste, both in terms of starting skills as well as in terms of magic access.

Yeah none of my RQ 3 players made it to Rune Levels. Still a little shaky on some of the new paradigms

I have been working on a lower level campaign using RQ G, myself. Still in development stages. I wish to be able to play all my old modules with the usual antagonists instead of having to sub in Gonn Orta ‘cause the players are too tuff for everything else (blueface gave ‘em a bit of heart ache but nothing they couldn’t handle <grin>).

I figure I could share my notes so far, hope they help a few folk.

So far, I start by taking them out of the twenties, I play in 1611, this removes some of the hero war perks, having them choose a cult to initiate to (rather than start at Initiate out of the box) eliminates another 75% worth of (cult) skills and a whack of RPs and spells, and without these freebies forces a little more focus on where to spend the remaining percentages points for future advancement. You could allow then to roll for initiating if they make the minimum requirements (and then give them the cult bonuses if you wish, spells, well your choice but maybe just a couple of Common Spells or as many as the are willing to trade POW for RPs: my HR) That still leaves somewhere between 135 to 175 percentage points for cultural skill bonuses,  and 140 to 185 percentage points for occupation skill bonuses. Add in the last bonuses;  the 150 (somewhat limited) personal bonus points and you have a fuck of a lot of points to be spread about. If you should halve the numbers given that would still put you at about 225 percentage points to spread around which compares to the 60 to 360 percentage points that RQ 3 gave (based on about 30 percentage points a year for must previous occupations and between 2 and 12 years of previous experience, not totally accurate ,just a quick sketch of the numbers)

Let them have all the passions, and runes from the core rules as well as the bonuses and give them the cult spirit spells as well as all possessions. let them go in debt to their cult for anything else the cult would be willing to loan cash for; which will probably not include a trip to Casino Town, and then bob is not only your uncle but makes an amazing Bison Burger. tell him Bill the Barbarian sent you.

15 hours ago, Crel said:

Fortunately, if you like the RQ3 engine better (and I do as well in several places) IMHO it's not too difficult to tack RQG's Rune magic and cults on top. I'm not quite convinced that D100 games are as modular as some folks claim they are, but in this case it seems pretty cut-and-paste to me. If, of course, that would suit your table and Your Glorantha.

Seems to work the other way around (taking RQ 3 and placing it in a lower level RQ G) once you tame down the new characters little. Makes me think that you are correct Crel.

8 hours ago, Puckohue said:

I've recently started a Borderlands-campaign with players who are mostly completely new to tabletop roleplaying. I use the RQ:G rules but have moved back the time to 1615.

So, based on your experiences how do you find my thinking then?

8 hours ago, Akhôrahil said:

Even though RQG badly needs a second edition made in less hurry, these bits are good enough to warrant using it.

If only you were wrong Akhôrahil, if only. Still a great game and worth the effort to make it better (let’s make RQ great ag... sorry)

8 hours ago, Joerg said:

There may be circumstances that require the player characters to miss their regularly scheduled holy day.

<snip for brevity?

4 hours ago, weasel fierce said:

I don't think it's a problem that temple maintenance is a strain on the community (if a modest one): After all the temple is the core of the community's survival in many cases. It would also help explain why "adventurers"tend to be tolerated, because despite their tendency to cause trouble and draw in enemies, they also tend to acquire large amounts of loot and potential sacrifice animals (if they win a victory over a rival clan f.x.).

Very nice and the first time I have seen it put this way, weasel fierce, So yes to both Joerg who as always is just correct, and weasel fierce

 

4 hours ago, weasel fierce said:

As far as the repeated upselling of RQG - Thanks guys, I get it.

Lets just pretend that I have seen the light and is totally for sure running RQG but I had questions about reducing the amount of rune magic and converting money from old scenarios.

 

Again hope my notes from the other side of the coin help. As to money conversion tips in the RQ RiG say 1 to  ten for RQ 3 to RQ G and as to your complaint about the lack of consistency within a single edition; I feel your pain. Thanks for the topic.

Oh and did you want fries with that? :>

 

 

[weasel fierce]

Thanks Bill. That and some fries would be great  

Seeing how people do things is always helpful. 

[BWP]

On 11/11/2019 at 12:07 PM, Bill the barbarian said:

You mean the only problem with RQ G would be that it is based on RQ 2. Sounds okay to me. Again, opinion. I agree that the rules to RQ 3 were sound, but I see no reason that RQ G will not make it there.

I didn't say it was "the only problem".

As for RQG "getting there eventually", that would require some evidence that those rules are going anywhere -- evidence that is currently lacking.  (Granted that it's relatively early days yet, but that works against it as much as it works for it.)

Supposedly we're getting some sort of major errata/overhaul in the not-too-distant future?  If so, we'll see how that looks and then judge how well the development process has gone.  Even with a completely successful overhaul, though, we're still stuck with "advanced RQ2" as the core engine, and it just can't carry that load.  RQ3 is just that much better.  Given that any rules set will need lots of house rules to work for the games I want to play in, I'd rather begin with the superior starting point.

[BWP]

14 hours ago, Akhôrahil said:

RQG provides runes, passions and a Rune Magic system that actually works. 

Even though RQG badly needs a second edition made in less hurry, these bits are good enough to warrant using it.

You've touched on the really good bits of RQG (and I'd also add the new character generation stuff), but have not mentioned the horrors of, well, nearly everything else.  Fortunately, those good bits are really, really easy to incorporate back into RQ3.

[weasel fierce]

1 hour ago, BWP said:

You've touched on the really good bits of RQG (and I'd also add the new character generation stuff), but have not mentioned the horrors of, well, nearly everything else.  Fortunately, those good bits are really, really easy to incorporate back into RQ3.

Given that the passions came from Pendragon, it'd be rather easy to port them to anything BRP, including RQ2 if so desired

Personally, I feel like the Rune stuff is a bit too too much, but I;'ll admit that I prefer the somewhat grittier early views of Glorantha, so that's 100% just me being difficult.

The Pendragon style background generation is very cool, though it's pretty campaign specific. Then again, given Pendragon 5, it seems that's the way Chaosium is choosing to take its games and I think it has its own advantages and disadvantages. 3 was "broad but shallow" in a lot of ways. Doing the opposite this time can turn out interesting. 

[Bill the barbarian]

3 hours ago, BWP said:

I didn't say it was "the only problem".

So your opinion of RQ 2 and RQ 2.5, er RQ G... we can put you down as undecided then hmmm?
It may not be your only reason but it seems to loom large in your complaint and for that matter it seems to be the only one I can find. I am getting old blind and senile however.

I will agree that RQ 3 is a better system (the best thing-possibly the only great thing, that AH did was to bring war game editing and organization to RQ, alas it ripped a part of the soul out the system when it removed Glorantha and then tried to tack it back on, I am sure that is half the reason they want to RQ 2 to try to find the soul.). Okay well that leaves little room to argue, You prefer a cleaner system that is already there and I wish to use a system I see stretching into the future and maturing well. 

Alas, my opinion is entirely subjective and base on past performance. I like the crew Moon Design that has Chaosium brought in. They are brethren players, they have made many great products and though they prefer RQ 2 (heretics...) I like the choices they have made so far, with the exception of releasing an unfinished game. but... after all this time I was happy something was coming out. Perhaps I am being polly-annaish but I think they will come though, hey it took 'em three times to get to the RQ we both prefer at the moment,

Sorry weasel fiercer about the slight drift from topic but I hope (it seems to be ) it is okay.

Cheers

[Puckohue]

10 hours ago, Bill the barbarian said:

based on your experiences how do you find my thinking then?

We've just finished our first session ("Scouting the Lands") so there's not really much experience to talk about. Your model for skill point reduction sounds good if you want a lower skill level game. I've also slightly reduced skill levels, although I've kept the "auto-initiation" as I remember missing that aspect of the game when I ran RQ3 way back.

I will say though, that reading this thread it's apparent to me that I have a very different perspective on the game than some. For example, I don't really care about the details in the combat system. We ran one combat and there's no way I was following RAW. I simply don't know the rules that well, the players are new to the game, and my main priority was MGF. I'll learn the rules as we go, and ignore the parts that I don't think make sense (or are, in my opinion, too crunchy).

I could run RQ3 or RQ:G - I really don't care - but I'll stick to RQ:G as far as possible as it's the current edition. My players lack the rpg experience needed to suggest rule changes, and rely on me telling them what goes and how. As far as they (and I) are having fun, I'm satisfied.

I'm thankful other people debate the rules though, as I think that might lead to improvements being posted as house rules, or as official rules errata.

[Kloster]

On 11/11/2019 at 6:33 AM, Crel said:

The other challenge is that if an adventurer is trying to optimize their access to and use of Rune magic, then the "one adventure per season" paradigm RQG encourages breaks down. For example, I can't just narrate "Weeks pass, and it grows hot as the world turns to Fire Season, when a mysterious courier comes to Pavis..." because my Issaries merchant player will go "hang on hang on hang on! I've got weekly holy days, and I want to be poking around each week to see if there's any new opportunities to Spell Trade with my bonus 1D6 Rune points on those weeks!"

We had the same problem.

[Kloster]

On 11/11/2019 at 12:51 PM, Akhôrahil said:

This.

RQG provides runes, passions and a Rune Magic system that actually works. 

Even though RQG badly needs a second edition made in less hurry, these bits are good enough to warrant using it.

Yes, Runes and Rune magic system are real strong points for RQG vs older versions. I'm much less enthusiastic for passions.

[HreshtIronBorne]

I have been absolutely in love with the Passion system. I personally have a decade and a half of experience with different pen and paper RPGs. The biggest benefit I have seen is for new players, it really is a huge help to be able to glance down and have some ideas of how your PC will react towards a given situation, even if they player knows next to nothing about Glorantha. 

[weasel fierce]

11 hours ago, Puckohue said:

 

I will say though, that reading this thread it's apparent to me that I have a very different perspective on the game than some. For example, I don't really care about the details in the combat system. We ran one combat and there's no way I was following RAW. I simply don't know the rules that well, the players are new to the game, and my main priority was MGF. I'll learn the rules as we go, and ignore the parts that I don't think make sense (or are, in my opinion, too crunchy).

BRP based systems can run just fine with surprisingly little of the rules in play. Roll to hit, roll to parry, roll for damage. The rest is gravy 🙂

 

[BWP]

18 hours ago, Bill the barbarian said:

So your opinion of RQ 2 and RQ 2.5, er RQ G... we can put you down as undecided then hmmm?

Undecided?  Here's what I wrote in a thread about "favourite version of RQ" from a couple of years ago (before RQG was actually released, I think):

"I started with RQ2, which I liked just fine, but it always felt a little incomplete ... but I like my games crunchy and detailed.  So when RQ3 came along, offering a lot more "crunch" and (mostly) refining what I already liked about RQ2, it quickly became my favourite system."

The design of RQG was a backwards step -- unless, of course, you're really keen on reselling all of those old supplements.  It doesn't help that, having decided to just copy-and-paste the old rules, nobody (apparently) thought to actually compare the new rules that were being written to make sure that they actually meshed correctly ... leading to the current messy state.  (Of course if they'd started with RQ3 the new rules might be equally messy!)

18 hours ago, Bill the barbarian said:

I will agree that RQ 3 is a better system (the best thing-possibly the only great thing, that AH did was to bring war game editing and organization to RQ, alas it ripped a part of the soul out the system when it removed Glorantha and then tried to tack it back on, I am sure that is half the reason they want to RQ 2 to try to find the soul.).

TAHGC didn't "remove" anything.  That was Chaosium's idea.  You can blame the production quality problems (flimsy paper, high price, etc.) of RQ3 on TAHGC, but all of the content problems (including the at-times terrible artwork!) were Chaosium.  All of the good content, though (including the rules improvements) was also Chaosium.  TAHGC deserve some fingers of shame being pointed at them, but make sure that they're being pointed for the right reasons.

(What I don't know is if the complete re-editing done by GW in the UK edition was approved by Chaosium, or if it was all their own work.)

18 hours ago, Bill the barbarian said:

I wish to use a system I see stretching into the future and maturing well.

So do I.  My point is that we have yet to see any evidence whatsoever that it's going to come from today's Chaosium, so your "wish" is really just "hope".  There's nothing wrong with "hope" in itself, but (referring back to the OP) providing advice along the lines of "stick with RQG, because we hope it will be good one day" is perhaps less than ideal.  And again ... even if all of the current issues with RQG are perfectly resolved with forthcoming errata, the game may become playable but will still be inherently flawed compared to the alternatives that might have been.

 

Edited November 12, 2019 by BWP

[Bill the barbarian]

1 hour ago, BWP said:

Undecided?  Here's what I wrote in a thread about "favourite version of RQ" from a couple of years ago (before RQG was actually released, I think):

 

 i remember that,

well a good argument was had, with fair fighting all around but I doubt I have changed your mind and seeing as I have been debating at a severe disadvantage (I prefer RQ 3, so, tuff fight for me, even if just saying I see good things coming in the future). I will depart this fight so that new and better things can come in this topic if not in real life.

Cheers

Edited November 13, 2019 by Bill the barbarian

[weasel fierce]

So how 'bout them ducks?

[Bill the barbarian]

17 minutes ago, weasel fierce said:

So how 'bout them ducks?

My bolgs are on the Sazdorf Wackers and Tacklers this season...

[soltakss]

On 11/11/2019 at 12:36 AM, BWP said:

Why do you believe that ("will be better eventually")?  Being completely tied to the RQ2 rules engine pretty much dooms RQG to be never more than "advanced RQ2", which is pretty darn limiting.

RQG is a good mix of RQ2 and RQ3 rules with some better stuff added on.

On 11/11/2019 at 12:36 AM, BWP said:

There are lots of good reasons to house-rule RQ3 in various ways, and several of those reasons come from RQG, but the core engine of the game is a lot sounder than the older rules.  (IMO, obviously.)

There is an awful lot of RQ3 rules in RQG, don't believe the lie that it is just RQ2+, it is really RQ2/3+.

What extra rules are in RQG? Off the top of my head:

• Runes are used well 
• Passions are really good
• The Sacred Time Economy is excellent
• The Resistance Table is better than before
• The way that Runemagic and Rune Pools work is really good
• It is slightly harder to lose a limb in RQG than in RQ2/3
• Sorcery is redone, probably better than RQ3 but I am not sure, as I haven't really grasped them and won't until I play a Sorcerer
• Shamans are a lot better in RQG than in RQ2 /3.

 

[soltakss]

On 11/11/2019 at 5:50 PM, Atgxtg said:

Yeah, but as you've admitted you still used the skills over 100% reducing the opponent's skill rule from RQ2 in your RQ3 games. So I think you were probably an easier convert to RQG than the typical "Massive fan of RQ3", as your RQ3 was always more of a RQ2-3 hybrid.

Ah, you've got me there!

On 11/11/2019 at 5:50 PM, Atgxtg said:

To me the pages and pages of clarification in the RQG rules thread to clarify how all the changes to the way the core game mechanics now work (for example the way two weapons now work, the different in critical and special chances for no real reason) is a big enough turn off to avoid RQG and either use RQ3 or RQ2, possibly porting over the Pendragon based inspiration rules and the easier rune magic use and recovery rules from RQG.

It could certainly have done with a lookover by someone who knew RQ2 and RQ3 and knew the differences between the rules, to stop, for example, both RQ2 and RQ3 Species Maximums being used in different places.

On 11/12/2019 at 1:50 AM, BWP said:

As for RQG "getting there eventually", that would require some evidence that those rules are going anywhere -- evidence that is currently lacking.  (Granted that it's relatively early days yet, but that works against it as much as it works for it.)

RQG has sold better than any other version of RQ, or so I am led to believe, so it is certainly getting there.

The RQG rules are quite serviceable. many of the percieved problems are due to the mix of RQ2 and RQ3-style rules sometimes being done without as much care and attention as might have been. I find that if you look at them with an RQ2 or RQ3 hat on, most of the problems go away, as we solved those issues in both versions, as Players and GMs.

On 11/12/2019 at 1:55 AM, BWP said:

You've touched on the really good bits of RQG (and I'd also add the new character generation stuff), but have not mentioned the horrors of, well, nearly everything else.  Fortunately, those good bits are really, really easy to incorporate back into RQ3.

Of course, you can port all of the best bits of RQG into RQ3, then you'd end up with something that looks like RQG.

On 11/12/2019 at 3:18 AM, weasel fierce said:

Given that the passions came from Pendragon, it'd be rather easy to port them to anything BRP, including RQ2 if so desired

Passions came from what Greg Stafford wanted to put into RQ3 but didn't have the space for, or so I am told, so he put them into Pendragon. Some version of Passions were in Griffin Mountain and in Dragonewts, both for RQ2.

Personally, I played RQ3 almost as soon as it came out, probably in 1986, having bought it in 1985. I played it, with some RQ2 things, until I started adding bits and bobs from Hero Wars, HeroQuest, Mongoose RQs and RQ6, so it became RQ3+, but still held on to it as my main game system, albeit houseruled. RQG was the closest thing to an official RQ that suited the House Rules that I had been using, so it suited me fine.

I am sure that other RQ3 fans would hate some of the things in RQG, though. What people like is very personal to them.

 

[Atgxtg]

Just now, soltakss said:

Ah, you've got me there!

I'm not saying your up to something bad ther eor anything, just that we all have out biases and houserules that affect out outlook on this.

Just now, soltakss said:

It could certainly have done with a lookover by someone who knew RQ2 and RQ3 and knew the differences between the rules, to stop, for example, both RQ2 and RQ3 Species Maximums being used in different places.

Yeah, it similar to what happened over at Mongoose with MRQ, only not as bad as at least the people behind RQG were familiar with RQ. 

Just now, soltakss said:

RQG has sold better than any other version of RQ, or so I am led to believe, so it is certainly getting there.

It's been better marketed and is pretty than any other version of RQ. I wouldn't be surprised it it has sold better than AD&D did. Back in the RQ2/3 days you had to have a RPG shop, and know about it to ever have a chance of getting the game, or at least somehow already be aware of the game to try and order it by mail. Now RPGing is more mainstream and someone can DL the rules from Chasoium or Drivethru and be reading the pdf in a minute or two.

I'm not saying that makes RQG a worse game, just that it's not a fair comparison. Maybe a better comparison might be how it sells compared to it's competition . RQ used to be one of the top 5 selling RPG back in the day. Of course, there wasn't as much competition back then etiehr. I mean for FRPGS there was D&D, RQ, DQ, C&S, EotPT and T&T, plus their variants and derivatives.

 

Just now, soltakss said:

The RQG rules are quite serviceable. many of the percieved problems are due to the mix of RQ2 and RQ3-style rules sometimes being done without as much care and attention as might have been. I find that if you look at them with an RQ2 or RQ3 hat on, most of the problems go away, as we solved those issues in both versions, as Players and GMs.

 

Yes, plus I think some of it was the fact that because of there being so many different takes on the rules over the years very few people are running things exactly as written, and not everybody uses every rule or remembers them the same way. For instance back with the BRP came out, Jason once stated that someone could, using the optional rules make it run just like RQ3. Except that category modifiers in RQ3 added to skill improvement rolls and the Skill Category Bonus in BRP do not.  I suspect Jason didn't run as much RQ3 as some other version of D100, so wasn't a rule he was using. It's not a stoning offense, or anything but it does play a factor in how and why RQG is the way it is. RQG is really more like RQ2+., with ahandful of RQ3 things thrown in.

Just now, soltakss said:

Of course, you can port all of the best bits of RQG into RQ3, then you'd end up with something that looks like RQG.

That's entirely subjective as people won't agree on the best bits. For instance I prefer RQ3 hit points over RQG hit points, so my best version would differ from RQG right there. Same with category modifiers (I hate big monsters being combat masters due to high STR), and skills over 100%. So to me it would look like RQ3 with a couple of house rules. Your Best RQ May Vary.

Just now, soltakss said:

Passions came from what Greg Stafford wanted to put into RQ3 but didn't have the space for, or so I am told, so he put them into Pendragon. Some version of Passions were in Griffin Mountain and in Dragonewts, both for RQ2.

That's a new take on the story. They way I heard it , RQ wasn't suitable for Glorantha, hence HQ used a different system, and that someone suggested porting the passion over to him as a solution.  

Just now, soltakss said:

Personally, I played RQ3 almost as soon as it came out, probably in 1986, having bought it in 1985. I played it, with some RQ2 things, until I started adding bits and bobs from Hero Wars, HeroQuest, Mongoose RQs and RQ6, so it became RQ3+, but still held on to it as my main game system, albeit houseruled. RQG was the closest thing to an official RQ that suited the House Rules that I had been using, so it suited me fine.

I am sure that other RQ3 fans would hate some of the things in RQG, though. What people like is very personal to them.

Yup. I, for one,  haven't exactly been shy about my preferece of RQ3 over RQG.  Part of that is becuase I like the RQ3 game mechanics more that I like Glorantha. Since RQG was, as far as I know, an attempt to make RQ work better for Glroantha, I find many of the  rule changes to be a a step backwards or inferior to the RQ3 equivalents, for instance two weapon use.  

For those who love RQG, great, enjoy. But if someone else, such as the OP would prefer to stick with RQ3 and add a couple of things they like from RQG to their RQ3 game, that's fine too. That's what all of us ol' timers have been doing for decades, and what the BGB was all about. 

[Akhôrahil]

4 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

That's entirely subjective as people won't agree on the best bits.

I think there’s a pretty solid consensus on what the good bits are - runes, passions, Rune Magic system that works (when it never did before), shamanism that is at least playable.

[Atgxtg]

2 minutes ago, Akhôrahil said:

I think there’s a pretty solid consensus on what the good bits are - runes, passions, Rune Magic system that works (when it never did before), shamanism that is at least playable.

Uh, the Rune Magic system worked before. People might prefer the new one, but the old one worked.This thread is the first place that I've read someone ever claiming it didn't. As for Passions Pendragon still does them better. Shamanism, especially on Glorantha has always been problematic.. And as for a consensus, well, a lot of the RG3 people just don't bother with the RQ section anymore. So  I think it is less of a consensus than a dividing of the fanbase. It's not so much that everyone has been won over than the folks who don't like RQG don't speak out against it much on the forums or have moved on. There are alot of new faces around here  (welcome!) but also a lot of old friends don't show up here anymore (😭). Not that all that is because of RQG. Most of it is probably just life.  Similar stuff happened when the BGB came out and didn't meet everyone's expectations.  It kinda comes with new editions of RPGs in general.  Come out with a new edtion, lose some fans and gain soem n ew ones. Hopefully you gain mor ethan you loose, and the new fans buy more than the old. 

[HreshtIronBorne]

10 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

Uh, the Rune Magic system worked before. People might prefer the new one, but the old one worked.This thread is the first place that I've read someone ever claiming it didn't.

I would probably agree that the rune magic system never really jived with how i imagined glorantha or how it is portrayed in other media, like KoDP for example. Everything in Glorantha is magical, but if you believe in gods only the toppest tier of believers ever bothered to use it. We played for years with initiates never wanting to spend a single point before they became Rune-Priests or Rune-Lords. Many many initiates died because of it. Lol. I personally love the bew rune magic system and the amount of magic actively seen in play at all levels. Even newbies get a few points to throw around. 

[jajagappa]

28 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

Uh, the Rune Magic system worked before. People might prefer the new one, but the old one worked.This thread is the first place that I've read someone ever claiming it didn't.

Having run RQ3 for 10 years, I think I'm qualified to say that Rune Magic worked ok, but it did not work great. Players rarely ended up with many of the fun spells - they had to get Spirit Block and Shield typically to have much hope of survival, and rarely wanted to invest tons of POW to build up a full arsenal.  Since running RQG, I've seen my players really take advantage of the flexibility to draw on either the special spells they've gained or the common spells. And it feels like they can actually become 'avatars' of the gods they worship. It feels like it fits now vs. being super-powered battle magic spells.

[soltakss]

29 minutes ago, HreshtIronBorne said:

I would probably agree that the rune magic system never really jived with how i imagined glorantha or how it is portrayed in other media, like KoDP for example. Everything in Glorantha is magical, but if you believe in gods only the toppest tier of believers ever bothered to use it. We played for years with initiates never wanting to spend a single point before they became Rune-Priests or Rune-Lords. Many many initiates died because of it. Lol. I personally love the bew rune magic system and the amount of magic actively seen in play at all levels. Even newbies get a few points to throw around. 

I have heard that and never understood it.

Soltak Stormspear rolled up with POW 18 and dumped POW into one-use spells as soon as he joined Orlanth Adventurous, every time he increased his POW. I think he had nearly 10 points of Runemagic before he became a priest, having spent a few points of shield and a Teleport, to save his life. After he became a priest, he got a lot of Runemagic, I'd have to check his character sheet, but he had at least 30 points, probably nearer 50. 

[Atgxtg]

31 minutes ago, jajagappa said:

Having run RQ3 for 10 years, I think I'm qualified to say that Rune Magic worked ok, but it did not work great. Players rarely ended up with many of the fun spells - they had to get Spirit Block and Shield typically to have much hope of survival, and rarely wanted to invest tons of POW to build up a full arsenal.  Since running RQG, I've seen my players really take advantage of the flexibility to draw on either the special spells they've gained or the common spells. And it feels like they can actually become 'avatars' of the gods they worship. It feels like it fits now vs. being super-powered battle magic spells.

Oh yeah, I agree that it could have been improved upon, especially for annoy who wasn't a Priest. I won't ague that. But the claim that Rune Magic works in RQG but didn't in the 30+ years of RQ before is false. 

I can see someone preferring the new Rune Magic rules and running with them, but that didn't make the old ones non-functional. And as far as best/consensus goes there are some people who were put off by the new Rune Magic rules. 

Edited November 15, 2019 by Atgxtg