Jump to content

mrq1


Daxos232

Recommended Posts

So you are saying that if the players kept repeately dying due to thier own actions you would change the game to eliminate that possiblity.

So when are you going to emilinate combat? Most PCs seem to die in combat.

Still focused on this only affecting the player involved, I see. Long as that's the case you're driving right past my point and there's not much point in my responding, A.

No, you7re not a mechanic. you7re a despot. People abuse something so you eliminate the something rather than let people learn from this mistakes.

This assumes that people will learn from it, want to learn from it, and won't do harm to the game and other's enjoyment while doing so. Like I said, I'll do the practical solution here, and if that upsets your ethos, that's your business. Someone who apparently thinks its better to let a recurring problem keep going than fix it because its "good for them" really doesn't have much to talk to me about on ethical grounds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 97
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

In real life or in an RPG? Real Life wise, certainly.But then the same holds true for those people who aren't rich, too. Most people don't get into sword or gun fights on a regular basis.

As far a characrters go in an RPG, it depends on the GM and the playing stle of the group. I7ve seen GMs who have had great difficulties daling with rich PCs. On the other hand I've seen Gms not worry about money at all. Money is more of a problem in games where players can freely shop for "goodies" (magical or other), especially in combant dominated games.

Well, training time in games that permit it is a goody; if fact its often the best one as it can't easily be taken away. To get anything comparable that's better you need to be in a transhumanist game where you could outright buy attributes, skills or other capabilities up-front.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It looks like everyone here at the site has some very passionate views about mrq1, one way or another. I did not assume my post would generate this much debate.

I do want to thank everyone who posted, whatever your opinion or standing may be. Its given me a better picture of this whole "RQ and MRQ" thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It looks like everyone here at the site has some very passionate views about mrq1, one way or another. I did not assume my post would generate this much debate.

I do want to thank everyone who posted, whatever your opinion or standing may be. Its given me a better picture of this whole "RQ and MRQ" thing.

Perhaps clearer than is comfortable for many of us. I hope you also asked your question over at Mongoose's forum. I think you'll get a different (but not wholly opposite) perspective.

Steve

Bathalians, the newest UberVillians!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah ... I do not want to interrupt your friendly chat, gentlemen, but has this not reached a point

where it would be better if you would snarl at each other by PM ? >:>

I make it a habit of not doing that. If its too heated a discussion to have in public to me, its too heated a discussion to be having.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It looks like everyone here at the site has some very passionate views about mrq1, one way or another. I did not assume my post would generate this much debate.

I do want to thank everyone who posted, whatever your opinion or standing may be. Its given me a better picture of this whole "RQ and MRQ" thing.

If you think this is bad, it's a good thing you didn7t stop by the Mongoose forums back when MRQ1 was first relased. THe moderator of this website got banned repeatedly from the Mongoose forums!

Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I make it a habit of not doing that. If its too heated a discussion to have in public to me, its too heated a discussion to be having.

I didn7rt think this was "heated".

I thought that the issues raised, such as shgould the GM protect the PCs from the actions of other PCs are worth discussing, but I'll drop it if that is what people want.

Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought that the issues raised, such as shgould the GM protect the PCs from the actions of other PCs are worth discussing, but I'll drop it if that is what people want.

In my view you and Nightshade have so very different styles of roleplaying that you are most

unlikely to find a common ground concerning the topic at hand, and therefore can only repeat

the same points over and over again, without convincing or even really understanding each

other - what Stanislaw Lem described as a discussion between a squirrel and a snail ... :)

"Mind like parachute, function only when open."

(Charlie Chan)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn7rt think this was "heated".

I thought that the issues raised, such as shgould the GM protect the PCs from the actions of other PCs are worth discussing, but I'll drop it if that is what people want.

I agree with the premise, but I do have to note using a term like "despot" isn't exactly keeping it down on issues. And what I consider heated and what other people do often aren't the same anyway (usually in terms of my being comfortable with a more intense exchange than other people are).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with the premise, but I do have to note using a term like "despot" isn't exactly keeping it down on issues. And what I consider heated and what other people do often aren't the same anyway (usually in terms of my being comfortable with a more intense exchange than other people are).

Point conceeded on the use of the word "despot". It does have negative connetations from it's traddtional usal that are an exxageration when applied in a gaming context. The difficulty is that "overrestrictive" doesn't lend it self to degrees the way forms of government "Autocrat" is probably more accurate than "despot" but then virtually all GMs are autocrats due to the nature of the postion og GM.

I think we do agree on "more intense exchange". The way Ilook at it, the whole point of a forum is open exhange on the topics pertaining to the forums subject matter, inense or otherwise. I generally don't get bothered unless someone gets rude, or thinfs turn into insults.

Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the reasons why I asked about MRQ1 was because it was my first game I ever GM'ed. I got the BRP gold book in November, but couldn't figure out basic stuff like how combat works. So I picked up MRQ1 for pretty cheap, and I used a lot of what was in that book for my first games.

I remember I made a heck of a lot of mistakes from misreading the books. My group and I thought that armor actually took damage, like it was a second shell of hit points, and could be destroyed by normal attacks. We also thought that the base percentages for the common skills was only affected if you had a characterisitc value above 10, like in D&D. So if you had 12 STR and 11 DEX, you had a base chance with Melee Weapons (STR+DEX) of 3%! This led to ridiculously low skills. Even with all those grevious errors, and the fact that we had some crappy people in our group, we still had a really good time, and everyone enjoyed it a lot.

Now I have the MRQ2 rulebook and we just played a game last saturday that my players said was the best time they have had so far. I'm creating my own setting, which has proven to be more work than I thought, since I have to make cults, religions, cultures, and assign what spells are available to them and such. Despite all that I enjoy it, and MRQ2 is way better than MRQ1, but for that first couple games it provided a good time.

That's why I asked, I wanted to know if it was really that broken. Now I can see that there was a great RQ history of excellence, and that was changed by MQ and other factors. Despite that, I think MQ's RQ2 is a big improvement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember I made a heck of a lot of mistakes from misreading the books.

Don7t feel to bad. You can7t actually play MRQ1 correclty by using the book. Even the guy who ran the playtrest did it wrong. The only way to run it "correctly" would be to have bogut the book, gone to the Mongoose Foru and download (the most current) rules update.

That's why I asked, I wanted to know if it was really that broken. Now I can see that there was a great RQ history of excellence, and that was changed by MQ and other factors. Despite that, I think MQ's RQ2 is a big improvement.

MRQ2 is certainly a big improvement over MRQ1. I think that is pretty much universally accepted by all. Where or not it is an improvment over Chasoium7s RQ2 or RQ3 is more a matter of personal preferce.

Ultimately, what hurt MRQ1 the most was probably not so much the changes made to the RQ system, but how poorly those changes were through out and implemented. Many of the changes were not throught through in terms on what problems they might cause in opther aspects of the game. Most of the problems could have been solved before the game had been released if they had been considered (most of the flaws were pointed out by the playtesters).

Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don7t feel to bad. You can7t actually play MRQ1 correclty by using the book. Even the guy who ran the playtrest did it wrong. The only way to run it "correctly" would be to have bogut the book, gone to the Mongoose Foru and download (the most current) rules update.

Is the SRD, found in the downloads section, the current rules update?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, the SRD is simply the merging of the various Mongoose RQI SRDs, reformatted and cleaned up again. I don't think that the changes have been put in, although there is no reason why they couldn't.

Simon Phipp - Caldmore Chameleon - Wallowing in my elitism since 1982. Many Systems, One Family. Just a fanboy. 

www.soltakss.com/index.html

Jonstown Compendium author. Find my contributions here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seemed to me that every decision in the design of MRQ1 was wrong, but I forget the details now. It had a couple of good ideas:

(1) Reducing the twin-track Hit Points mechanisms (Overall and Locational) to just one - but chose the wrong one;

and (2) Introducing a means of rewarding Role Playing (IPs), the only serious omission from RQ2/3 - but again implementing it wrong by breaking the elegant ticks system.

The reason I REALLY didn't like it though, was because of the grossly insensitive D&D-minded way it handled Runes, which wrecked the 'feel' of the Glorantha setting. (Physical Runes, attuned to their owners until death, force characters to go round killing people to get rewards. Yuk!)

(So much so, that I didn't even look at this thread until now, just because of the title...)

Britain has been infiltrated by soviet agents to the highest levels. They control the BBC, the main political party leaderships, NHS & local council executives, much of the police, most newspapers and the utility companies. Of course the EU is theirs, through-and-through. And they are among us - a pervasive evil, like Stasi.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is IPs?

My confused conflation of Improvement Rolls & Hero Points into "Improvement Points". Thought someone had used the term upthread, sorry.

Britain has been infiltrated by soviet agents to the highest levels. They control the BBC, the main political party leaderships, NHS & local council executives, much of the police, most newspapers and the utility companies. Of course the EU is theirs, through-and-through. And they are among us - a pervasive evil, like Stasi.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Useful-looking site, but a bit of a tease. Where's the "Open Source RPG system compatible with RuneQuest III" they promise?

Okay, so which ones werer you referring to? :P

Both, since both are given by the GM so can be used to reward RP (that's "RolePlaying" :P). ;)

Edited by frogspawner

Britain has been infiltrated by soviet agents to the highest levels. They control the BBC, the main political party leaderships, NHS & local council executives, much of the police, most newspapers and the utility companies. Of course the EU is theirs, through-and-through. And they are among us - a pervasive evil, like Stasi.

Link to comment
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...