Jump to content

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, DreadDomain said:

I presume future supplement based in other areas will offer a family background specific to said area. Would be a shame if it wouldn't!

Yes, I believe that will be part of the plans for opening up new Homelands.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  a lot of good answers

On 7/12/2020 at 10:26 PM, Videopete said:

Unlike Dungeons and Dragons simple paradigm of go into dungeon kill monsters, and  a host additional premade adventures to run, Runequest is a bit harder.  How do you run and design adventures and scenarios for runequesy

How to play RuneQuest ? : Follow Jeff advices, they are top ! . Choose RuneQuest - Adventures in Glorantha for a good start, another setting like Western occident, Eastern Kralori or vormain bushi are hard because you will need a ton of old books and time, .... unless you have tens or twenties years free 🤣

When you start a Run(e)quest adventure, don't forget to tell you players to bring their brains, be prepared to have a lot of fun and to deal with their own Di(c)e.

How to "design" Runequest : You must know Glorantha First and immerse yourself and your players IN
-Read the Comics : http://www.princeofsartar.com/comic/introduction-chapter-1/
-Get your hand on Khans of Khans, an prepare to have a lot fun : https://www.chaosium.com/board-and-card-games/
-Checks all arts : ONE VERY BEST things in the new RuneQuest are the Fabulous Art : Any cover or illustrations give you the "Runes and Quests Vibes" you need to have in memory and expose to your players for them to impersonate their gloranthan. If you have choose the PDF books, print some art on a full page+colors : It's Worth it...👍


How to design scenario : There is a lot of premade adventures like The Broken Tower from the Quickstart or The Dragon of Thunder Hills for the Game master screenpack (with some adventures seeds) And recently the recent two pdf-books Pegasus Plateau and Smoking ruins; A lot examples of what is a RuneQuest Scenario.

I will not give you a RQ-for-dummies-scenario manual because there is too much to say ... My Essentials Advices as RQ - GameMaster are :
-Any adventure creation process start with "What I want them to discover today..."
-Every Knowledge, Answers and myths will always vary and so "your answers may vary with each adventurer point-of view / culture"

-Any conclusion should have a bit of "some unsolved mysteries remains" (Keep the Myths alive)

 

PS : For any RuneQuest material, sourcebook, books, comics, GM comments or anything in the forums apply One Rule : "Everything you learn is subjective, partial and depending of  from the point of view of the writer" (Prince of Sartar book is the must of in this as much as the RQG Sourcebook).

Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIIW, I think my point about GMs playing the game they would like was miinterpreted and probably mis-spoken a bit by me.  I meant that, as many stated, the GM needs to focus on his players and what they are looking for. Obviously no one runs a game they don't enjoy running (for long), but nor will he have players if they don't enjoy it.

I was really reflecting on this because as an RQ 'ancient', then away for a long time, and reading up on some of what's been published/done in my absence, I struggle between my love for Glorantha & RQ, and the "seeming"  (an important word there) inconsistencies that SOMETIMES interfere with RPG play.  The bigger the world (Glorantha, Tekeumel, etc.) the harder it is to 'hold it' together from a 'does the world really work' point of view.  All RPGs have this tension between advancement makes you better, etc. ...why are the  NPCs where they are, and does the world work.  The old RQ1 and RQ2 rules on training, etc. mean if a party gets oodles of money they can buy and learn all sorts of stuff.  But, looking at the economy of the ancient world WHY is there ever 2000L in a bag somewhere?  The Chaos creatures are particularly strong, and things like Mallia spread SO much easier than they are stopped.  Why are there ANY Chalana Arroy priests/lords?  Their inability to fight means unless protected constantly they die off.   Our players loved RQ because in the day we did a lot of Markland and SCA.  RQ's fighting aligns with our experiences that numbers count, and luck matters.  But if luck matters it is really only a matter of time until your character gets their head cut off.  So, finding that blend on 'reality' of the campaign, yet obviously we play to be 'heroes' and not accountants.  Apple Lane is a LOT of fun early in a campaign.  But I've known some parties that could kill everyone in town including Gringle.  How does Apple Lane survive?   I don't propose answers..just meandering thoughts.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CharloixBrooKiller said:

But, looking at the economy of the ancient world WHY is there ever 2000L in a bag somewhere?

Because someone was watching The Treasure of the Sierra Madre on a TV matinee one Saturday afternoon and thought, "THAT would make a great scenario!"  Then they forgot to include the notes on ENC and Fatigue until the 3rd Ed.

!i!

Edited by Ian Absentia
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Ian Absentia said:

Because someone was watching The Treasure of the Sierra Madre on a TV matinee one Saturday afternoon and thought, "THAT would make a great scenario!"  Then they forgot to include the notes on ENC until the 3rd Ed.

!i!

I wanted to both say 'laugh' and 'like', but it is not possible, so I clicked on like, but I would say I can't stop laughing (and I love Treasure of the Sierra Madre and a lot of other old westerns).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just added the note about Fatigue (which remains a sticking point for many about RQ3).  There's a lot to be learned and borrowed from old Westerns (though The Treasure of the Sierra Madre is set in the 1920s, showing the timelessness of the setting).  Hauling multiple weapons and armor around is one problem -- packing out your treasure is another entirely.  I have a jar here with about 2,500 US pennies, and that alone is nothing to sneeze at.  CBK's comments about being out of keeping with the local economy are right on the nose, too.  Who's going to produce goods and services for the local community when you can sell them to the rich interlopers at grossly inflated prices that no one else can afford? (C.f., The ripple effect of tech company employees driving up local real estate prices.)

I'm much happier with the cattle economy described in the current edition of RQ, and losing my shit over finding a bag of 50 L, a half-dozen gemstones, and a fist-sized chunk of iron.

!i!

Edited by Ian Absentia
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/12/2020 at 9:26 PM, Videopete said:

Unlike Dungeons and Dragons simple paradigm of go into dungeon kill monsters, and  a host additional premade adventures to run, Runequest is a bit harder.  How do you run and design adventures and scenarios for runequesy

I think of a situation, put it in a location, flesh it out with NPCs and let the Players loose on it.

There is nothing about RuneQuest or Glorantha that makes this any different from D&D or any other game, as regards scenario writing.

I have played in monster-bashing dungeons in RuneQuest and they have been great fun. I have also played in scenarios where we have wiped out a temple full of chaotic initiates and Rune Levels, they were fun as well.

RuneQuest works as well as anything for combat-based scenarios. It also works for investigative scenarios. It can be good as social scenarios as well. so, whetevr the type of scenario you want, RuneQuest should be OK with it.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see the difficulty here...

Most of the time, you can come up with something based on the players' interests.

Some of the time, you have to come up with something yourself.

Almost all of the time, people will engage and have fun. We are all there to have a good time with our friends.

My last session of HQG was a trainwreck. I actually haven't had a faceplant that bad in over a decade, and I have GMed several times a month for the last fifteen years (I took a break from ~1998-2002, and I mostly played when I returned until around 2005). Big deal. It's a good thing to fail now and again. Obviously, you don't want to fail too often, but you learn things every time you fail. It's not some esoteric art or science, it's having a good time with your friends. 

Give the group a couple things they may be interested in and they will fill in the blanks. The fail I just had was because I allowed a group to create characters that are all obstructionist and don't go together...in most situations even that set of restrictions is superficial, but I focused too much on the ones who were talking and ignored the others causing the plot to bottleneck to a point where no one understood what was happening...and it was clearly stated several times that there was an immediate danger in the line of thinking/behavior they were undertaking. When the ball dropped, it was my fault for not reeling them in and just resetting the stakes. I'm laughing right now thinking about how they told me they weren't interested in playing Easy mode. They asked me to be punitive, which is never something you want to do as a GM, especially in a situation where based on the way they are playing is easy to exploit.

The only "rule" to scenario/campaign design is to never actually punish them, unless they go out of their way to beg for it. Faking punishment to cause tension is fine, it's a great tool in your box, but no matter how much they say they want to have the rails taken off, they are lying (I say this as a player and a GM). It's fun to fail up to a point, and even to end a campaign with a loss if you feel like the group did their best, but it's another thing entirely to just take a dump on them at every opportunity...even if that's what they ask for

Just listen to them (unless they tell you to screw them over relentlessly) and act accordingly.

Honestly, the only hard rule in rpgs is to keep everyone engaged as much as you can, when one or two people check out you are in for a disaster. Even in a setup where all you are doing is killing monsters and taking their stuff, you have to keep people talking and interested...the rest (the fun) happens naturally.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tedopon said:

The fail I just had was because I allowed a group to create characters that are all obstructionist and don't go together...

This is a mistake I've done several times, and still do occasionally. I'm always torn between letting people play whatever they want, and having to constrain them to make the group work. I'm getting better at spotting it though... luckily, most of the times I've done that mistake, the players were able to meta-play and basically say "well my character might not do that but let's not derail the game so I'll tag along for now". Another time, a player voluntarily made his character part ways with the group and created a new character for the next session. Much later, they met the old character as an NPC!

Edited by lordabdul
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

At this point -- unless I intend for the game to be a 1-shot -- I mostly insist upon either a group "Session Zero" or an exchange of e-mails with one another during char-gen.

Every PC must have at least one solid positive personal link to at least one other PC.  Childhood friends, war-buddies from the same campaign, etc.

NO "lone wolf" PC's.  No PvP intra-party backstabbery PC's.

I'm considering a "shared goals" clause too -- each PC must share in at least one "common goal" shared by at least  half the group.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

I'm looking at g33k's posting and strongly agree with several points: solid positive personal link, no "lone wolfs", no intra-party backstabbing (luckily that has not been a problem). I like the idea of the "common goal" as well. 

A previous game I started, I had the following: a PC who created a detailed backstory, with supporting NPC's and home town and everything - and then doesn't want it to be mentioned or included in any of the adventures. Another PC created a backstory, but then promptly ignored everything about it. A third player refused to create any sort of backstory because "that would limit his character". And of course, one player had a "great idea for a character" that had nothing to do with the game, and then that player tried to force-feed their 'great idea" into Glorantha and Pavis - where it didn't fit, and then they got upset, because I wasn't giving them a chance to do what they wanted to do. 

So basically, half the players exerted their egos and did the "you have to GM whatever I want, but I don't have to play within your setting the way you want" thing. One of those players is now out of the game, and another has started incorporating backstory into their play. The saddest part is that the information below was part of the GM's handout to the players at the start of the game:

  1. Glorantha is Glorantha. This game is set in a world that is at least 90% canon Glorantha. This means the world has a history, cultures, customs, and mythologies. While you are welcome to advance your own ideas, ultimately, they must fit within the framework provided. A tie-in to this is that Glorantha is a world where people make their home, murderhoboes – the homeless killers that make up the bulk of adventurers in most games – are not particularly welcome in Glorantha. People are expected to have familes, clans, and social ties.
  2. The Game is set in Pavis. This game is built around rubble adventuring in and around the city of Pavis, in the years of the lunar occupation. Build a character who is appropriate for that setting and type of adventure. There’s no point in creating the long-lost heir to Maniria, as the focus of the game will never be in Maniria, and your plot concept will be wasted.
  3. Proactive players. As a GM I prefer players who have ambitions, plans, and ideas of things they want to achieve and do. But please keep point 1 and 2 in mind when you’re coming up with your character concept: I’m not changing the world or the game setting for one player.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/12/2020 at 4:26 PM, Videopete said:

Unlike Dungeons and Dragons simple paradigm of go into dungeon kill monsters, and  a host additional premade adventures to run, Runequest is a bit harder.  How do you run and design adventures and scenarios for runequesy

It doesn't have to be any more complicated. If you look back at some of the earliest RQ adventures, they were essentially D&D style dungeon crawls. 

Ideally, you can start small, with simple adventures, and then add more details, NPCs and such as you go along. One thing that helps me a lot is to use the events and character interactions that take place during a game session as a springboard for future adventures. If the PCs fight some one, maybe they, their friends, or their family come looking for revenge? Maybe that healer who helped them out needs help now? 

The idea is to build upon existing relationships to add depth to the world. Once you get into the habit of it, it actually makes it easier to pull the players into new adventures. Players tend to be much more willing to go out and rescue an NPC they've met before who has helped them in the past, than to rescue someone they've never even heard of.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone said on another thread that one problem with playing characters that fit into a culture is that whilst the characters know about and love the culture, the players probably don't. I think this is why some players are drawn to murder-hobos, it's simple. You don't have to figure out how to care about people that you don't care about. You can't get it wrong.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

Someone said on another thread that one problem with playing characters that fit into a culture is that whilst the characters know about and love the culture, the players probably don't ...

Glorantha is the only setting that I -- personally -- love enough to ask my players (who are NOT Gloranthaphiles) to make this effort.

I generally find myself (strongly) in agreement with the sentiment that these deep rich settings are an obstacle to immersive play, in large part because of this huge disconnect between the players and their characters.  The players neither know what their PC's know, nor care about what their PC's should care about.  They don't "fit" in the wonderful world.

 

4 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

... I think this is why some players are drawn to murder-hobos, it's simple. You don't have to figure out how to care about people that you don't care about. You can't get it wrong.

I don't think murderhoboism is the automatic outcome, but it seems to be the default mode of "action-adventure" (whether movie or videogame or RPG) does often lean in on this trope...  Rambo, John Wick, Call of Duty, Doom, etc etc etc.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, g33k said:

The players neither know what their PC's know, nor care about what their PC's should care about.  They don't "fit" in the wonderful world.

That's one reason I find the character background useful.  It's an exercise in the players making some investment in the world.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, jajagappa said:

It's an exercise in the players making some investment in the world.

It's also less a player's character concept and more of an exercise in programmed adventure.  C.f. "Classic" Traveller vs Mongoose Traveller.

But, of course, as the rules clearly state, the Family History tables are optional, as are the random d20 rolls for events and outcomes.  They're a good go-by, for Dragon Pass at least, but if one has the Guide and/or Sourcebook, one can riff off the timeline and look farther afield.

!i!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

wow...say good bye to Dragon Pass?  lol  for us true old timers that's absolutely anathema.

 

But I confess, I've enjoyed re-reading about RQ and GLorantha, and seeing the varoius newer versions.  I get it...nothing gets frozen in time. I suspect the 70s and early 80s were just a special time for us who 'were there'.  A lot of Glorantha was still being figured out, and for those of us with some 'in sight' into what was developing was just the right time and right place.  I will state, I moved away from RPG playing for a lot of reasons.  But a big one was the endless quest for 'improving" your character versus each adventure. I think Call of Clthulu ( sp?) addressed that by being (at least for our groups) being more episodic oriented than 'campaign' oriented.  Everyone is entitled to their own tastes.  Not demeaning anyone else's.  I'm sure not everyone enjoys remember migrating their D&D characters from 6 sided dice HPs to the varity pack of dice when AD&D came out.  LOL

 

game on games.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/17/2020 at 2:44 PM, Ian Absentia said:

I have a jar here with about 2,500 US pennies, and that alone is nothing to sneeze at

Well, that is a minimum of 6 and a ¼ kilos (based the Lincoln penny, the Shield penny weighs more). Nothing t be sneezed at. The smaller currency (common) coin in DP is the clack, which weighs in at .2 troy oz... or 500 troy oz for 2500 of those....About 15 and a half kilos getting heavy. Hmmm @lordabdul, how much is that in cow?

Edited by Bill the barbarian
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...