RuneQuest's Unwritten Rules - Akhelas

[Austin]

Hey all! As some of you know, I write articles over on my website, akhelas.com, which are often about RuneQuest. This week's article, "RuneQuest's Unwritten Rules" generated a LOT more conversation on social media than I anticipated. Since I know there's folks over here who don't use social media, I thought I'd share the article's link here as well. I'm working on the assumption that quantity of conversation is proportional to how interesting the material is.

If you guys want me to share RuneQuest articles here more often, I don't mind doing so. I mostly don't want to spam the forum too much with promoting my own stuff. I'm aware that most of the time I'm on BRP Central nowadays is spent sharing/teasing my Jonstown Compendium products. I want to stay mindful that the real purpose of a forum is discussion, not showing off.

Self-anxious preamble aside, linkety link: https://akhelas.com/2023/12/29/runequests-unwritten-rules/

Edit: second article on bonus stacking here: https://akhelas.com/2024/03/22/unwritten-rules-bonus-stacking/

Edited March 22 by Crel

[Joerg]

Discussion often needs a more or less controversial statement to get off, and subsequent exchanges tend to help form opinions.

In this case, you are pointing out some of the consequences of the delay of a GM guide that would provide such meta-rule observations, possibly by following a fictive GM statting out a creature "balancing" the effects of its various skills, attacks etc. And given the limitations of the Jonstown Compendium license, a thing like that might have to be an ORC supplement for BRP UGE rather than RQG with strong hints of cross-platform applicability unless provided by Chaosium and inserted into the sequence of upcoming (and long delayed) products.

Edited December 30, 2023 by Joerg

[TrippyHippy]

Honestly, there is no question that Runequest: Glorantha is a complex RPG - both in rules design and setting. 

The original Runequest rules were simplified into ‘Basic Roleplaying’ rules by the time Stormbringer and Call of Cthulhu were released - removing elements from the combat system especially and developing other areas of the game to smooth out more granular aspects of gameplay. When the Hero Wars/Heroquest rules were developed they were deliberately designed to be more ‘narrative’ in as much as there was a preference for a less complex game system. 

The more recent version of the Runequest: Glorantha rules adds more skills, more magic systems, a rune-based personality system, family background generation and passions into the mix. The setting is much, much more developed than it was also.

I am not saying these are bad things to have but it is what it is. I would hasten to add that the RuneQuest Starter Set is arguably the best product of its type on the market (and in the current market that is saying something!). There are also plenty of fans that love the complexity of the setting mythology as well as the crunch in the rules as signature elements of the Runequest game. The growing range of Cult splat books is really showing the scope of what you can do with the game when you master it - but that is the commitment you need. It isn’t a pick-up-and-play casual game in any sense.

I guess the designers could have made the core rules book slimmer by stripping out the Sorcery chapter and the family background generator. I’d whisper it quietly, but they could have also held back the Rune traits as an optional rule too (saving everything for an expansion companion) but then I bet there would be lots of complaints about that if they had.  We also have the BRP generic book if you want to create something simpler. 

Edited December 30, 2023 by TrippyHippy

[Runeblogger]

Regarding the trample attack, I’d say the damage modifier does not apply, because the creature is not using its strength, only its weight. So a special attack would not cause additional damage.

[DreadDomain]

Complexity comes in many flavors, some good, some bad. Putting the setting aside for the moment, I'll use a few specific examples to illustrate my point.

First, runes and associated personalities, passions, most of the skills and even the background generation, make the game rich and dense. They are not complicated to use at all, but they do add tasty layers of character and setting definition from a mechanic perspective. Yes, it comes at the price of a longer character generation process but that can be bypassed for those who do not want the tasty morsels. In my book, these are the best parts of RQG.

Second, the resistance table is not particularly complex, but it does require to either look up at a table or do some easy computation in your head. In addition, some contest requires to add (or average) two characteristics on each side of the contest before the success result can be determine. Finally, there is already another opposed roll system, so it begs the question, was this other mechanic needed (rhetorical question)? In the aggregate, the resistance table do add a bit of complexity and it is fair to wonder if it worth it. Different groups will have different answers.

Third, combat is allegedly the most complicated part of the game, and not necessarily in a good way for many groups. There are quite a few cognitive loads that need to be carried. Determining the Stike Ranks (are you engaged or not? it works differently), figuring out the result of the attack versus the defense (there is a lot of information on the matrix and it's not necessarily consistent), damaging weapons, rolling damage, subtracting armor, removing hit points, removing location hit points, figuring out effect on said location, if any... Wheeww, lots going on. Some groups will revel in it. Some won't. After looking at a few actual plays (including Chaosium's) and witnessing how combat did (not) flow or looking at people getting confused by the rules, I concluded that RQG's combat needs a cleanup.  

[RandomNumber]

15 hours ago, Crel said:

Hey all! As some of you know, I write articles over on my website, akhelas.com, which are often about RuneQuest. This week's article, "RuneQuest's Unwritten Rules" generated a LOT more conversation on social media than I anticipated. Since I know there's folks over here who don't use social media, I thought I'd share the article's link here as well. I'm working on the assumption that quantity of conversation is proportional to how interesting the material is.

If you guys want me to share RuneQuest articles here more often, I don't mind doing so. I mostly don't want to spam the forum too much with promoting my own stuff. I'm aware that most of the time I'm on BRP Central nowadays is spent sharing/teasing my Jonstown Compendium products. I want to stay mindful that the real purpose of a forum is discussion, not showing off.

Self-anxious preamble aside, linkety link: https://akhelas.com/2023/12/29/runequests-unwritten-rules/

Thanks for publishing the article - it's a set of useful observations. I don't mind complexity when it serves a purpose - there's a trade-off. My group is prepared to accept a good deal of complexity for the sake of plausibility and verisimilitude. Hence we play RQG and Mythras. Back in the day, I adapted 2300AD to incorporate Phoenix Command but that's another story...

I reflected that perhaps it's not so much a 'hidden' rule as 'no' rule in this case.  Absent clarity, it may be that each of the contributors interpreted the halving of a damage bonus their own way and it wasn't picked up.  It seems unlikely there are design principles that establish cases when the damage bonus needs to halve the number of dice rolled, others when the number of faces on the die needs to be halved and others when no damage bonus at all is required. Or if there are, then perhaps I've found my complexity trade-off tipping point 🙂

[radmonger]

 

13 hours ago, DreadDomain said:

After looking at a few actual plays (including Chaosium's) and witnessing how combat did (not) flow or looking at people getting confused by the rules, I concluded that RQG's combat needs a cleanup.  

I would second that. Though imho part of this issue is that runes and passions were literally layered on top of RQ2 combat, rather than integrated into it.

So there is a table that says how much a given level of success on a runic inspiration roll will modify your chance at succeeding in a weapon attack roll. The value in that table is added to your skill. This modifies the values of the success, special, critical and fumble thresholds you need to roll under. Once you have rolled the dice, the level of success attained looked up in another table, cross-referenced with the similar level the defender rolled, to see what actually happens.

Or if you look at the section on chariots (p221), you will find that being trampled by a chariot deals 1d6+6 points of damage to each of 1d6+1 random hit locations, with details on how armour and spells protect.

That seems a reasonable enough rule, and would means a tough guy wearing leather armour is reasonably likely, though far from guaranteed, to survive. That seems a reasonable baseline for what would happen to someone trampled by a herd of wild horses.. But because it is an add-on rule specific to chariots, rather than being part of the core rules, it isn;t used elsewhere. Instead you will find that a horse (in the bestiary) has a 'trample' attack that is entirely different (4d6 to a single location, and being able to miss, fumble or critical). 

 

[Malin]

9 hours ago, RandomNumber said:

Back in the day, I adapted 2300AD to incorporate Phoenix Command but that's another story...

Just needed to handshake trying to incorporate Phoenix Command (into our cyberpunk/spacemaster for us) into anything...

[Rodney Dangerduck]

19 hours ago, DreadDomain said:

First, runes and associated personalities, passions, ... make the game rich and dense. They are not complicated to use

I agree with your conclusion that "RQG's combat needs a cleanup".  Or at least a semi-official "quicker combat rules"

As for Runes and Passions, I don't think they are "simple".  Well, the rules themselves are simple. Except...

1. when it comes down to the GM deciding if a Passion or Rune is applicable for an augment.  Then it's a a mess.  I remember a White Bull episode where Jeff let's a PC use Air to augment their Climb to get over the walls of Pavis.  Isn't Water the proper Rune for that?  If not, why write guides for the runes at all?  And much of the time Jeff just says "no", you can't try any Inspiration for this simple situation.
2. when, in a roleplaying situation, a GM requires a PC to roll their super-high Death or Love XXX and the player really doesn't want to follow the result.
3. when they fail their Inspiration and the rules subtly vary between Passions and Runes.

[DreadDomain]

1 hour ago, Rodney Dangerduck said:

when they fail their Inspiration and the rules subtly vary between Passions and Runes

Agreed. These subtle variations do not bring much to gameplay and easily confuse people.

[Malin]

9 hours ago, Rodney Dangerduck said:

I remember a White Bull episode where Jeff let's a PC use Air to augment their Climb to get over the walls of Pavis.  Isn't Water the proper Rune for that?

Yeah, that is the one rule that I have entirely disregarded. At my table, we augment depending on the vibes...

[jajagappa]

9 hours ago, Malin said:

Yeah, that is the one rule that I have entirely disregarded. At my table, we augment depending on the vibes...

I have no issue augmenting if the Rune seems appropriate. For climbing, I'd accept at least Air, Earth, Water, Movement, and Harmony.

[Austin]

10 hours ago, Malin said:

Yeah, that is the one rule that I have entirely disregarded. At my table, we augment depending on the vibes...

This is one I tend to go back and forth on. Lately, I've felt it's more fun to be more restrictive in which Runes can augment what abilities because that encourages Runic diversity among the adventurers. While "Climb" does feel a bit odd for "Water," as a designer I like that adventurers strong in the Water Rune are more likely to succeed with risky or inexperienced Agility skills.

Especially in the case of Runes with fewer "high-profile" spells (like the Water or Stasis Rune), I feel this contributes to balancing the "coolness factor" among players at the table.

[Rodney Dangerduck]

7 hours ago, jajagappa said:

I have no issue augmenting if the Rune seems appropriate. For climbing, I'd accept at least Air, Earth, Water, Movement, and Harmony.

We allow Runes and Passions as Augments / Inspiration.  But tend to be on the strict side.

If the GM is liberal in accepting "off" runes, it quickly devolves into the player always using their highest, or maybe 2nd highest, rune.  Which usually means Air, Earth, or Movement for the typical PC.  As @Crel notes, GM strictness "encourages Runic diversity".

Also, you'll get more arguments.  For example, why are you accepting Earth or Harmony for Climb?  Then the GM spends minutes explaining why they think Harmony is appropriate, and probably get a lot of confused looks and counter arguments...

This is one of many cases where I think the rules are hard to interpret and adjudicate...

Edited January 2 by Rodney Dangerduck

[jajagappa]

5 minutes ago, Rodney Dangerduck said:

why are you accepting Earth or Harmony for Climb?

Earth - depends on what they are climbing, but if a hillside, they are able to focus on the rock, the soil, and find the right grips.

Harmony - because they are able to draw upon focused, harmonious thoughts undistracted by the disorder of the world around.

But also keep in mind that I ran HQG for a lot of years, so I'm very used to having players use Runes in creative ways. And usually I find that interesting, but some are too much of a stretch and would not be applicable. 

[Malin]

7 hours ago, Rodney Dangerduck said:

If the GM is liberal in accepting "off" runes

I'm also pretty quick to say no to players. For climbing, for example, I would allow air on a windy cliffside where the wind is actually an issue. Or Earth, if that's the element of what they're climbing. Might allow darkness if they do it during the dead of night. Even movement if there's a race element involved and they need to do it fast and take big risks. Just... vibes at the moment. Not allowing the highest one just because.

Edited January 2 by Malin

[Nick Brooke]

22 minutes ago, Malin said:

I'm also pretty quick to say no to players. For climbing, for example, I would allow air on a windy cliffside where the wind is actually an issue. Or Earth, if that's the element of what they're climbing. Might allow darkness if they do it during the dead of night. Even movement if there's a race element involved and they need to do it fast and take big risks. Just... vibes at the moment. Not allowing the highest one just because.

That's the essence of being a Game Master, right there. These games take place in a social context. You will know, sitting at the table, if your friends are making reasonable bids or are cheekily "trying it on" (and coincidentally using their highest rating, every time). I can't teach you that. It's not about "interpreting and adjudicating rules": it's about the flow of the session. Rulebooks can't defend you against pettifogging rules-lawyers: only GMs can do that. It's their job.

[Joerg]

14 hours ago, Crel said:

This is one I tend to go back and forth on. Lately, I've felt it's more fun to be more restrictive in which Runes can augment what abilities because that encourages Runic diversity among the adventurers. While "Climb" does feel a bit odd for "Water," as a designer I like that adventurers strong in the Water Rune are more likely to succeed with risky or inexperienced Agility skills.

Climb withteh water rune is myhthically correct (beyond agility as a watery property) as for most of Godtime rivers ran uphill, as did Lorion into the sky.

[smiorgan]

I'm currently running a group of 4 through a RQ campaign, 3 of them relative newbies to the system and I am not having propblems with RQG with all the bells and whistles on. It works. We do forget to apply this or that other rule from time to time... and nothing bad happens. Which brings me to my main point.

BRP in general, and RQG in particular, is not a tightly designed system. It's a system with a super simple core and layers of detail that hang loosely to it and are there to add color and granularity. If you strip the layers you will lose color but the system will not break down. In other words, BRP degrades nicely. That's in my opinion the single most important unwritten rule at the mechanical level.

That makes RQG very unlike other rules heavy systems - e.g. Pathfinder or D&D4 - that are tightly balanced with very interdependent parts that would break down the system if taken away. In my view, RQ6/ Mythras is an attempt at making RQ a bit more tightly designed, while RQG went cheerfully in the other direction.

As I said, I'm not having issues with RQG full on, but my plan B was to start taking away parts and reduce complexity in case my players were overwhelmed. And it's very easy. You can go pretty extreme without destroying the system. Obviously, the game becomes less fun, at least for people who like detail. 

0. Ignore character history in generation. But that's already written in the rules.

1. Ignore sorcery. We're in Dragon Pass, after all. And those Lankhor Mhy scholars will be fine with just Rune Magic as in RQ2.

2. Ignore weapon strike ranks. SR1 for Rune Magic, Dex SR for missiles and spirit magic, Melee SR for melee. 

3. Ignore locational hit points and effects of wounds althogether. General hit points only. Just use hit locations for armor and to record individual wounds for healing. Yes, that means that you can have 1 hit point left and a 10 hit points wound at left arm and be fine. 

4. Ignore damage to weapons. Just use weapon HP to determine max. damage parried. 

5. Ignore effects of criticals and/or specials and fumbles in combat. Ditch the attack-parry matrix except for the cases that involve normal success and failure.

6. Ignore multiple defenses and/or the -20 penalty. You can parry or dodge once per round (for a deadlier game). Or you can defend as much as you want without penalty (for a less deadly game). 

6. Ignore levels of success althogether. Remember to still use the subtraction rule for skills over 100. In opposed rolls, if both parties succeed you roll a second time remembering to apply the -25 penalty. If it's still a draw, higher skill wins. If both parties fail, the GM narrates a suitable outcome.  In every case, opposed rolls are the most overrated mechanic in rpg design history. Just have the players roll their skills - represent opposition with a malus.

7. Ignore the resistance table. Use opposed rolls of the stat x5, or x4.

8. Ignore penalties for failed augments. Note that if you ignore levels of success successful augments are always +20. 

9. Ignore passions. Unless you use a spell to create them.

10. Ignore runes. Rune magic does not need a roll.

11. Ignore augments althogether.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 2 by smiorgan

[Malin]

18 minutes ago, smiorgan said:

n other words, BRP degrades nicely

VERY true. I am running two groups now, both with newbies involved. I haven't removed many rules, mostly streamlined combat (strike ranks, movement, added good handouts for the players), but kept the complexity since everyone likes to fight. I've found that combat in RQ actually goes a lot faster than in DnD, sure there are more rolls involved in a single round, but there are a lot fewer rounds to go through.

Also, playing it online through Roll20 does a LOT of the heavy lifting when calculating criticals, specials, damage, and the like. I might have had to simplify more in a person-to-person setting to get the flow going.

I do like how robust the RQ system is to tampering and adjusting to suit the table.

Edited January 2 by Malin

[Nick Brooke]

Treat the rules as fractal: when action isn't important, you can easily speed through it. You do not have to apply all of the rules, all of the time, especially to unimportant situations. The Football Fight scene in Black Spear is a good example. I would hate to try running that scene with strike ranks and hit locations and all that jazz, so instead I give you shortcuts and explain how to keep the session moving along briskly. If you would prefer to set up a tactical battle-map with 250 friendly and 250 hostile NPCs, I can't really help you, but you have to recognise that this is your choice.

Similarly, if you read a scenario and immediately think "this monster is too weak for my players," just increase its hit points, armour points and/or damage output. "The monster is too strong for my players?" Halve its hit points, armour points and/or damage output. Your oblivious players will not notice, but if they did, they would thank you. You're the game master, you're meant to quietly balance this stuff so that your group has a good time. It's not a wargame, you're not trying to "beat" them or enforce "realistic" outcomes if that results in unsatisfying sessions. ("Another TPK? Let's generate new characters and try again.") 

[smiorgan]

Another thing that I have noticed. I've said this on Facebook but it's worth repeating: the strike rank tracker that comes with the starter set is an amazing tool. Very useful to teach the rules and to keep focus.

In general, the starter set is well worth having. 

 

[smiorgan]

18 minutes ago, Malin said:

Also, playing it online through Roll20 does a LOT of the heavy lifting when calculating criticals, specials, damage, and the like. I might have had to simplify more in a person-to-person setting to get the flow going.

Yes, that's my experience as well. It's very handy especially for one of our players who is very much into the story, but not so much into learning the rules. In person it could take a bit more time, but not much, especially if I'm ready to help that player.

 Interestingly, the player who does not remember the rules behaves exactly the same when we play in Middle Earth with LOTR 5e rules, which is arguably a less detailed system.  

[RandomNumber]

On 1/1/2024 at 10:00 AM, Rodney Dangerduck said:

As for Runes and Passions, I don't think they are "simple".  Well, the rules themselves are simple. Except...

In my idle moments I wonder if the runes are the 'characteristics' we need and that STR, CON, DEX etc could be abandoned.

[Malin]

1 hour ago, RandomNumber said:

In my idle moments I wonder if the runes are the 'characteristics' we need and that STR, CON, DEX etc could be abandoned.

In my idle moments I have wondered if I could do a hack inspired by Knights (french ttrpg) and use a combo of stats + runes to generate dice pools for rolling and skip skills. If only I didn't have too many projects already...