Jump to content

RuneQuest: Classic Fantasy


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 137
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Hi Thaenor, The book is finished, turned in, and 90% edited. It is currently awaiting internal art. Other than that I can't get really specific other than to say that in light of all the Moon Design/C

Oh, it will be a nice hardcover. Rod's work deserves nothing less.

BRP fans are nothing if not patient, and there is the saying "If it is late, it is late once. If it is bad, it is bad forever". Take the time needed.

Posted Images

My main problem with the BGB is its SIZ.

Well, my RQ6 PDF is 458 pages, compared to 404 pages for BGB.

OTOH, the BGB has a nice APP, but RQ6 has its own CHA. The (in)DEX of each is about equal, though.

Comparisons of INT, POW, and EDU are left as an exercise for the reader.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 5 months later...

I don't care what name you call it just give me scenarios, scenarios or adventures, adventures maybe even campaigns, campaigns. Pleeeeeease

Once Classic Fantasy is out, you should be able to pull out adventures written for AD&D, D&D BECMI/RC, or OD&D and run them in RQ6 just replacing statblocks. You might even be able to manage it with 3.5/Pathfinder/5e.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Good to hear CF II (?) is making good progress, I have one campaign that will depend on it... while we wait, can I ask a question in relation to it and RQ6 rules?

 

Namely, have RQ6 rules for making enchanted / magical items changed much from Mongoose RQ/Legend rules? Is the idea of investing characteristic points (POW or maybe other ones as in Age of Treason?) still in RQ6, and will it be so in CF as well? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good to hear CF II (?) is making good progress, I have one campaign that will depend on it... while we wait, can I ask a question in relation to it and RQ6 rules?

 

Namely, have RQ6 rules for making enchanted / magical items changed much from Mongoose RQ/Legend rules? Is the idea of investing characteristic points (POW or maybe other ones as in Age of Treason?) still in RQ6, and will it be so in CF as well? 

 

Hi Verderer,

 

Currently I have no rules for enchanting items in Classic Fantasy due to space limitations and I'm already struggling with making cuts to get the manuscript down to a manageable page count.

 

However I'm figuring on pitching a Companion to Loz and Pete if the first book does well. The companion will contain all the cut stuff as well as have more monsters, spells, magic items, and NPC classes, in addition to the rules for enchanting magic items.

I really can't speak for what rules are in RQ6 on the subject as I have yet to need to reference the material for research purposes, so I don't know how they compare to those of Legend. However, if someone doesn't pop up here with the answer, I would consider posting the question in another thread so it may have a better chance being noticed by someone in the know.

 

Thanks for your interest,

 

Rod

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Good to hear CF II (?) is making good progress, I have one campaign that will depend on it... while we wait, can I ask a question in relation to it and RQ6 rules?

 

Namely, have RQ6 rules for making enchanted / magical items changed much from Mongoose RQ/Legend rules? Is the idea of investing characteristic points (POW or maybe other ones as in Age of Treason?) still in RQ6, and will it be so in CF as well? 

 

I have been running a CF campaign for nearly 2 years and I am working on some house rules for magic item creation.  My version is partially based on John P Meyers's enchantment ritual rules which you can find in the download section. My version will require a 120% spell lore skill and the permanency spell for most items. Racial specific items, like a cloak of eleven kind, can only be created by a wizard of that race, magic users cannot create clerical magic items, certain items are too powerful for mortals to create, etc...

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the idea of enchanter having to invest some power permanently to create magic items (like the One Ring), it makes them more personal and interesting. But I was wondering how this would translate into D&D types of settings, where usually +1 swords seem common as mud? Of course, there are rituals around this requirement, you can tap some other poor fellow etc. but that seems kinda evil?

 

So Bob, in your system you don't have to invest permanent POW/Magic points or whatnot?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the idea of enchanter having to invest some power permanently to create magic items (like the One Ring), it makes them more personal and interesting. But I was wondering how this would translate into D&D types of settings, where usually +1 swords seem common as mud? Of course, there are rituals around this requirement, you can tap some other poor fellow etc. but that seems kinda evil?

Hey Verderer, while not related to Silent Bob's system, I just posted something to this effect last night on the Design Mechanism's forum.

 

"For my AD&D games that I used to run, it wasn't about making magic items, it was about the thrill of discovering them. So as far as bringing that philosophy to RQ: CF, I wanted a background reason for why they are not typically being made any more. What I came up with is that magic waxes and wanes, and about 1000 years ago the mana levels of the world were at their peak. Magic points could be drawn from the surroundings and used to enchant items pretty easily. Now, 1000 years later, the world mana has waned to its lowest point, with only a few locations of magical or spiritual significance still possessing mana like puddles slowly evaporating after a storm. This, along with the few points a living creature can generate on their own, means that the time for the creation of magic items "of significance" has long passed. And the best magic items are still waiting in some forgotten tomb, or sealed in the ruins of some lost civilization somewhere."

 

So while it doesn't really tackle the prospect of making magic items, it does explain why they are so numerous, yet not really being made anymore.

Rod

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the idea of enchanter having to invest some power permanently to create magic items (like the One Ring), it makes them more personal and interesting. But I was wondering how this would translate into D&D types of settings, where usually +1 swords seem common as mud? Of course, there are rituals around this requirement, you can tap some other poor fellow etc. but that seems kinda evil?

 

So Bob, in your system you don't have to invest permanent POW/Magic points or whatnot?

Obviously, the availability of magic items is a personal preference. RQ3's sorcery system allowed for a huge number of magic items.

 

In classic fantasy, low power magic items like potions and scrolls are fairly common and can be purchased from the wizards guild or alchemist shops.

 

In my campaign, permanent magic items like a +1 sword are more rare and cannot be purchased with money.  You would have to find a +1 sword on an adventure or you may be able to trade other permanent magic items for the +1 sword.

 

All permanent magic items cost permanent POW to create on a one for one basis.  Example a +2 sword costs 2 POW. 

 

Even recharging a wand requires at least 1 POW to prime the wand to accept charges.

 

I don't feel that the permanent POW cost is unreasonable, because in Classic Fantasy it cost permanent POW to cast many rare spells like disintegrate, power word, wish, etc... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Verderer, while not related to Silent Bob's system, I just posted something to this effect last night on the Design Mechanism's forum.

 

"For my AD&D games that I used to run, it wasn't about making magic items, it was about the thrill of discovering them. So as far as bringing that philosophy to RQ: CF, I wanted a background reason for why they are not typically being made any more. What I came up with is that magic waxes and wanes, and about 1000 years ago the mana levels of the world were at their peak. Magic points could be drawn from the surroundings and used to enchant items pretty easily. Now, 1000 years later, the world mana has waned to its lowest point, with only a few locations of magical or spiritual significance still possessing mana like puddles slowly evaporating after a storm. This, along with the few points a living creature can generate on their own, means that the time for the creation of magic items "of significance" has long passed. And the best magic items are still waiting in some forgotten tomb, or sealed in the ruins of some lost civilization somewhere."

 

So while it doesn't really tackle the prospect of making magic items, it does explain why they are so numerous, yet not really being made anymore.

Rod

 

Rod,

 

I like this.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually maybe I am making a fuss about nothing? I checked Legend rules for enchantments, and it talks about Sorcerous enchantments only, and how you use permanent magic points to create items etc. These magic points are tied up in enchantment, so you cant use them, until the item is destroyed etc, but you don't have use your own magic points for this. They can be tapped or gained from crystals too, and I imagine there are various creative ways of getting MP in Blood Magic as well?

 

Legend is curiously silent about divine enchantments (maybe mythic resonance, runes etc. were considered too 'RQ' for Legend?), but if we use the main idea from RQ2, then divine items are created by 'teh gawds' so you don't have to worry about that, just invent a good background story for the holy item? Clerics can bless items too, but these are temporary, for the most part I guess?

 

So maybe enchanted items are not too hard to explain in D&Desque world using RQ rules? Assuming of course, that RQ6 rules are anything like the above? Age of Treason had some interesting ideas about enchantments, namely that you can invest any charasteristic points in them, not just magic points or POW. But maybe this is going too far, as far as Classic Fantasy is concerned?

 

I currently have only RQ Essentials which doesn't appear to have anything on enchantments, so I don't know what the currect RQ stance is towards Enchantment mechanics?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Hey Darkholm,

 

I'm in the process of finishing it up. I have a few more monsters and spells to add but it is essentially finished, "feature complete" as they say in the video game industry. I "hope" to turn it in before the end of the month. At that point I will await feedback from TDM on what additional changes may be required. If all is well, then it comes down to whatever time is required for edit and layout. Plus I know some art still needs to be commissioned as well.

 

So that's the progress report on my end.

 

Rod

  • Like 1
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...