LEGEND

[lawrence.whitaker]

But I suspect that even so RQ6 is intended to be seen as much more than just a rulebook.

Precisely this.

Chaosium's RQ, before Avalon Hill, evokes such fond memories because, for its time, it was a more complete game, with a different atmosphere to its contemporaries, and focused very heavily on creating high-quality, detailed, equally evocative supplements (Cults of Prax/Terror; Griffin Mountain; Borderlands; Pavis, etc). It doesn't matter they were tied to Glorantha - the sheer scale and quality of these supplements marked them out from the crowd. RQ never needed a book filled with arms and kit, or a monster manual, or half a dozen new spell/magic systems. It still doesn't, AFAIC. We'll put those bells and whistles into the core book and then focus our attentions on different products.

We want to get back to the brand's values - which are far more than just the RQ name. Its an approach and ethos that deserves to be kept vibrant. I think a lot of that has been lost and Design Mechanism wants to try to recapture that. Its not simply nostalgia; it is about offering quality - both in the execution of the rules, and the supplements we then produce to support them. I have no interest in doing an Arms and Equipment book. I've no interest in producing a conventional monster manual ('Monster Island' is intended to be as much a campaign setting as it is a bestiary). I have tons of interest in producing setting and campaign packs, and books of good, standalone scenarios, that hark back to Chaosium's most innovative days.

[RosenMcStern]

Its not simply nostalgia; it is about offering quality - both in the execution of the rules, and the supplements we then produce to support them. I have no interest in doing an Arms and Equipment book. I've no interest in producing a conventional monster manual ('Monster Island' is intended to be as much a campaign setting as it is a bestiary). I have tons of interest in producing setting and campaign packs, and books of good, standalone scenarios, that hark back to Chaosium's most innovative days.

Trif, this board really lacks a "Like it" button.

[Mankcam]

Yep, I think Loz just crit his Orate Roll for promoting RQ6 - if there were any doubts then they are squashed now!!!

[dragonewt]

It doesn't matter they were tied to Glorantha - the sheer scale and quality of these supplements marked them out from the crowd.

...

Its an approach and ethos that deserves to be kept vibrant.

...

Its not simply nostalgia; it is about offering quality - both in the execution of the rules, and the supplements we then produce to support them.

Thank you guys for working to put the song back into the forest and restoring the intangible something (depth, layering, scope, insight, etc...) that was almost lost.

Edited December 9, 2011 by dragonewt

[Prime Evil]

Legend is a great system - but at the moment it is simply a reprint of existing content under a new brand name. We don't yet know where Mongoose will take the system once all of the existing MRQII products have been reprinted under the Legend brand. It's possible that Mongoose will sink the line by rushing out a heap of sub-standard products that are poorly written and poorly edited. I hope that they don't do this, but it's a real possibility given past history. RQ 6 sounds like a different beast entirely - it has a strong emphasis on quality over quantity. I also expect it to be more innovative than Legend, addressing some of the shortcomings of the existing rules. It's a pity that Mongoose didn't take a bit of time to clean up some of the ambiguities rules, but I suppose that they wanted to get Legend out the door as soon as the RQ licence expired. I think that the success of the new brand has taken them by surprise as Matt previously indicated that sales of MRQII were not as strong as Mongoose would have liked. I suspect that they were going to pump minimal resources into the Legend product line and may now be re-evaluating their strategy.

Personally, I hope that Legend will bring in new players - a percentage of whom will graduate to either RQ 6 or BRP (according to their personal taste). Because the two systems are closely related, it should be trivial to use material from one with the other. The one big advantage that Legend has over RQ 6 is the OGL - if the game builds up some momentum, it is possible that we will see an ecosystem of third-party material develop around it. It's a pity that RQ 6 isn't also released under the OGL, but it looks like Design Mechanism is happy to enter into licensing arrangements with publishers who want to produce RQ 6-compatible products, so it's all good. However, I wonder if we will see a few dual-stat products that attempt to address both systems...

Edited December 9, 2011 by Prime Evil

[frogspawner]

RQ 6 sounds like a different beast entirely - it has a strong emphasis on quality over quantity.

So... like the BetaMax to Legend's VHS, then?

Actually, I hope they'll gain synergy by feeding off each other, rather than being out-and-out competitors. We here could help that by creating dual-stat translations (for RQ6/Legend and BRP?) and publishing them here on BRP Central.

[Prime Evil]

So... like the BetaMax to Legend's VHS, then?

Actually, I hope they'll gain synergy by feeding off each other, rather than being out-and-out competitors. We here could help that by creating dual-stat translations (for RQ6/Legend and BRP?) and publishing them here on BRP Central.

Actually, I think that the best thing that we can do is to help newcomers find their way through the range of different d100 and show them just how compatible they are with one another. At the moment all of these systems are seeing a resurgence that would have been hard to imagine only a few brief years ago and people who have never tried them before are starting to show some interest. It doesn't matter whether somebody discovers the system through Legend or RQ 6 or BRP or Renaissance of Aeon or Call of Cthulhu - we should make them feel at home and show them how they can take the elements they like from all of these games to develop something that meets their personal tastes.

[RosenMcStern]

The one big advantage that Legend has over RQ 6 is the OGL - if the game builds up some momentum, it is possible that we will see an ecosystem of third-party material develop around it. It's a pity that RQ 6 isn't also released under the OGL, but it looks like Design Mechanism is happy to enter into licensing arrangements with publishers who want to produce RQ 6-compatible products, so it's all good.

The way you describe the situation is not completely correct. As I have used both licenses, allow me to clarify the difference. What the Legend OGL permits and the RuneQuest Gateway license does not, is to build a new system based on the core rules, like d101 did with OpenQuest. The Gateway license implies just that you do not write anything offensive in your supplement, put the RQ logo on the book, and send a copy or two to The Design Mechanism, and you are ok. No complications, and no lengthy negotiations needed. What you _cannot_ do under the Gateway license is to write an entirely new game...

...but since you can do it under the Legend OGL, actually you need not do it

[Guest Vile Traveller]

...but since you can do it under the Legend OGL, actually you need not do it

Or, to take it a step further (as RQ6 and, indeed, MRQ1 did) - if you're going to write an entirely new game, you don't even need the OGL!

[frogspawner]

Actually, I think that the best thing that we can do is to help newcomers find their way through the range of different d100 and show them just how compatible they are with one another.

Well, yes. I just think stat-translations between the various products that come out would do exactly that - showing their similarity.

-

If your side didn't care, you wouldn't oppose us who want out...

Just an update to our readers on this topical subject: Rust then sent me a few Referendum/Leaving the EU PM's of enjoyable debate. But I think both they and the anti-British anger shown by 'Mr & Mrs Merkel' (and others who wanted our money) prove "the other side just does not care" isn't true.

[rust]

... prove "the other side just does not care" isn't true.

If we really have to continue this here, this is the statement of our parliament's

leading EU politician:

http://newsburger.de/krichbaum-bringt-eu-austritt-grossbritanniens-ins-spiel-31113.html

Whatever system you use to translate it, the meaning will be obvious: If Britain

wants to leave it should leave.

Our president is the only important politician who declared that he wants Britain

to stay in the EU, all the others declared that we can just as well do without a

British EU membership.

And as for our media and public opinion, well, this is what our biggest paper wrote:

http://www.bild.de/politik/ausland/euro-krise/nach-camerons-nein-in-bruessel-was-haben-die-briten-jetzt-noch-in-der-eu-verloren-21497450.bild.html

The translation could be: What are the Brits still doing in the EU ?

So, yes, over here people really do not care - in fact, the number of people who

would prefer Britain to leave as soon as possible is obviously growing.

And I think this should be our last attempt to hijack this thread.

Edited December 10, 2011 by rust

[frogspawner]

And I think this should be our last attempt to hijack this thread.

Just letting the guys know how it went. Thanks for caring.

But, as you've raised the subject of us British leaving... We are honouring the existing treaties - and it's those which define the EU. It's you "EZ+" chaps who are inventing something new and non-EU. So who's leaving who, exactly?

Edited December 10, 2011 by frogspawner

[RosenMcStern]

What about continuing this interesting political debate on a more appropriate media like someone's Facebook profile? I offer mine, if needed.

Just not here.

[rust]

- deleted -

Right, not here.

Edited December 10, 2011 by rust

[seneschal]

On the other hand, you could dual stat your assorted Prime Ministers here, in both Legend and RuneQuest 6 format, thereby keeping things on topic and getting to eat your cake, too!

[rust]

On the other hand, you could dual stat your assorted Prime Ministers here, in both Legend and RuneQuest 6 format, thereby keeping things on topic and getting to eat your cake, too!

I am fully prepared to forego that experience.

[frogspawner]

On the other hand, you could dual stat your assorted Prime Ministers here, in both Legend and RuneQuest 6 format, thereby keeping things on topic and getting to eat your cake, too!

I'll do it! My copy of Legend is currently wrapped and (figuratively) under the Christmas Tree, however. Just one PM though - Dave Cameron (who else?) - but in his two forms: Smarmy, Con-man scumbag pre-Veto, and continent-saving Hero after...

[RosenMcStern]

Only in Legend format please. RuneQuest 6 will include rules for Passions, an I do not want to see the Passions of the Italian PM statted, lest this turns into porn...

..oh, wait, we have sacked THAT Prime Minister

[frogspawner]

...oh, wait, we have sacked THAT Prime Minister

Oh good. I mean, I've just devised some Traits/Passions rules, which I rather like (although they're not very tested as yet), and maybe they will help bridge the gap between Legend and RQVI.

1) Choose 2 traits/passions for your character, preferably from the standard Pendragon ones. (You can earn more in-play, up to a maximum of CHA/4, round down - see below).

2) If you are acting according to one of your traits, you can re-roll a skill being used (capped at CHAx5%).

That's the basic system - not too hard, I hope. And to gain more traits:

3) If you act very notably according to a trait you don't have (GM decides), you get a 'threat' of gaining that trait. (list it in brackets - but you don't get re-rolls for it, yet...)

4) If you later again act notably according to a 'threatened' trait, then you fully gain that trait. NB: If you have reached your CHA/4 limit of traits, then you have to lose one of your current ones to make way for it.

Each Trait/Passion can relate to the campaign's Divine Forces/Principles, so a character's allegiance/alignment can be determined from their traits virtually at-a-glance. (And Rule 4 makes for those dramatic changes that can be such fun! )

(PS: And by 'we sacked', I take it in this case you mean 'Merkozy sacked'... (sorry, couldn't resist!))

[Prime Evil]

Is it possible to develop a generic set of Traits/Passions rules? Or should these be specific to each campaign setting?

For example, could you apply the Traits from Pendragon to an Elric campaign? Or a Clockwork and Chivalry campaign?

I'm curious to see what people think a universal traits/passions list would look like. It touches on the difficult question of whether human behaviours are inherent or culturally determined.

Also, can you apply the same set of traits/passions to nonhuman characters that you do to humans? To take a simple example, should the creatures of Faerie in a Pendragon campaign have an alien psychology or should they follow recognizable human motivations? What about Melnibonéans? Can human players do justice to nonhuman psychologies anyway?

[frogspawner]

Is it possible to develop a generic set of Traits/Passions rules? Or should these be specific to each campaign setting?

For example, could you apply the Traits from Pendragon to an Elric campaign? Or a Clockwork and Chivalry campaign?

For purposes of discussion, here are the standard Pendragon traits:

1.Brave(Valorous)/Cowardly; 2.Prudent/Reckless; 3.Chaste/Lustful; 4.Energetic/Lazy; 5.Forgiving/Vengeful; 6.Generous/Selfish; 7.Honest/Deceitful; 8.Just/Arbitrary; 9.Merciful/Cruel; 10.Modest/Proud; 11.Spiritual(Pious)/Worldly; 12.Temperate/Indulgent; 13.Trusting/Suspicious; and Passions (various Loves/Hates & Loyalties).

I've developed the underlying mechanism, given above, that seems pretty good. The traits-list may not be perfect, but I'm happy to leave it as-is for now in my campaigns (which are traditional fantasy). Others can fine-tune it for theirs as they see fit.

[dragonewt]

See also the Dragonewt personality traits: Personality Traits and Advancement to Dragonhood

[rust]

Is it possible to develop a generic set of Traits/Passions rules? Or should these be specific to each campaign setting?

Perhaps not specific to each campaign setting, but there can certainly be major differen-

ces between cultures, and also between historical periods of the same basic culture.

For example, looking at the German society's favoured traits and passions during the Dark

Ages, it is obvious that they do not have much in common with their counterparts of me-

dieval China or of modern Germany.

To take a simple example, should the creatures of Faerie in a Pendragon campaign have an alien psychology or should they follow recognizable human motivations?

I very much doubt that Pendragon's "Pious / Worldly" would have any meaning for one

of the Fearie creatures, even "Merciful / Cruel" could well be a totally alien concept to

them.

[seneschal]

Yeah, folklore fairies were a pretty capricious lot. Even a "good" fairy might calmly watch you drown in a bog without helping, and a "bad" one would actively mislead you into the bog in the first place. There's a reason frightened farmers and herdsmen paid protection to the "Good People" in groceries and booze.

[SDLeary]

I very much doubt that Pendragon's "Pious / Worldly" would have any meaning for one

of the Fearie creatures, even "Merciful / Cruel" could well be a totally alien concept to

them.

No, but for game purposes, you could assign a Fae creature a high Worldly, and a higher than "normal" cruel, and probably get the desired game effect.

In a discussion on the Pendragon boards a while ago, Greg decided to change Pious/Worldly to Spiritual/Worldly. The argument being that Piety is really the Passion Love: Diety. Using this pairing, you could even give a Fae a high spiritual, and just omit the Love: Diety passion.

SDLeary

SDLeary