RuneQuest...Where to start?

[RosenMcStern]

Insignificant differences.

Cool! Send in your RQ3 Rune Lord with Protection 4 against my RQ3 Humakti with Bladesharp 12 and Parry 12, and let's have his arms insignificantly lopped off.

[RosenMcStern]

Especially if it doesn't require me having to hunt them down on ebay.

I think this sums it all up. When will we old-schoolers learn that suggesting people to get oop versions of games we like instead of the supported ones is actually a nail in the coffin for our beloved game systems? And, needless to say, a point scored for That Other Game.

[frogspawner]

Cool! Send in your RQ3 Rune Lord with Protection 4 against my RQ3 Humakti with Bladesharp 12 and Parry 12, and let's have his arms insignificantly lopped off.

'Insignificant' to convert. If you want to - we don't all want to power-game like that...

As for what is outdated and what is out of fashion, well, I'll explain my idea: <SNIP>

You seemed to be equating old with bad and new with good - which is clearly wrong.

When will we old-schoolers learn that suggesting people to get oop versions of games we like instead of the supported ones is actually a nail in the coffin for our beloved game systems?

When there's an in-print version that's better than the oop versions (or even just as good as...)

Ehm, in fact I wanted to suggest MRQ but it is terribly unpopular on this forum.

And with reason - MRQ isn't as good as true RQ/BRP.

The only advantage MRQ had over true RQ was that the Mongoose version was in print. Thankfully, with the arrival of BRP, that's gone!

But, great though the new BRP book is, it doesn't have everything you'd need to start a fantasy campaign (treasure, religions), has plenty that's irrelevant (modern, supers, futuristic), and has a lot of options (which are initially confusing for a beginner).

Hound of Tindalos: Buy RQ2 - you won't regret it! It's not hard to find on e-bay, and should only cost you about 10 quid (20 dollars?). Then if you have any cash left over, buy BRP - and update any rules you think need it.

[RosenMcStern]

You seemed to be equating old with bad and new with good - which is clearly wrong.

New is usually better, but not necessarily. 80% of MRQ is newer-but-not-better than old BRP versions. Thankfully some details are actual improvements.

When there's an in-print version that's better than the oop versions (or even just as good as...)

You missed my point. As long as the old-schoolers sleep with their dusty old books like teddy bears (ahem, I have a whole collection of RQ3 and CoC books on my nightstand ) and encourage newbies to buy them, publishers will be a bit afraid to invest in D100/RQ/non-D&D. Companies make games because they think they'll sell, and if they see fans of classic games always saying "I'll stick to the old version, nothing can be better." where do you think they'll put with their money? And you will not see better versions if the money stays away - sad but true.

[frogspawner]

New is usually better, but not necessarily. 80% of MRQ is newer-but-not-better than old BRP versions. Thankfully some details are actual improvements.

Assertion, not evidence. I'd say that 90% of MRQ was worse than the pre-existing RQ versions. The only good things in MRQ were the ideas of: (1) a mechanism to reward roleplay; (2) dropping strike-ranks; and (3) not having to track both Total HPs and HP-per-location. But the actual implementations of even those ideas were bad.

You missed my point. As long as the old-schoolers sleep with their dusty old books like teddy bears (ahem, I have a whole collection of RQ3 and CoC books on my nightstand ) and encourage newbies to buy them, publishers will be a bit afraid to invest in D100/RQ/non-D&D. Companies make games because they think they'll sell, and if they see fans of classic games always saying "I'll stick to the old version, nothing can be better." where do you think they'll put with their money? And you will not see better versions if the money stays away - sad but true.

I didn't miss your point. Having lost that one, you are just trying to make another. But I cannot agree with the view that we should buy bad product from Mongoose (or anyone) in the hope they will then make enough money to publish better stuff later!

It works like this: first someone publishes a good product - then customers buy it.

I have seen the MRQ SRD, and so I will not be buying Mongoose's stuff - it is sub-standard.

But I have bought BRP - and soon I will have bought it three times!

Hound of Tindalos: Please do not think we in the BRP/RQ community are all argumentative so-and-so's! But I just can't let this guy's untruths go unchallenged. (When he first came to this forum - from the MRQ one - he described this place as "too civilized", btw !)

[RosenMcStern]

I'd say that 90% of MRQ was worse than the pre-existing RQ versions.

Actually I said the same, but with less offense for people who just did their job, in one way or another. And with less boldface.

(3) not having to track both Total HPs and HP-per-location.

I would say it was their biggest rule design fumble instead. They fixed something that was not broken. The poll that Rurik run on this site shows that three BRP players out of four do not mind marking off hit points twice.

But I cannot agree with the view that we should buy bad product from Mongoose (or anyone) in the hope they will then make enough money to publish better stuff later!

I never said your should buy their stuff. I am just saying you should not encourage new players to buy used stuff instead (which does not include BRP). The point is not where you put your money, it is whether you throw mud at people who were just anxious to publish some d100 stuff as a sound alternative to the d20 c*** they usually sell.

It works like this: first someone publishes a good product - then customers buy it.

Windows Vista (not to mention its predecessors) provides undisputable evidence of the fact that you are wrong (and note that this shows how the market works, not how it should work.

[RosenMcStern]

And just to go totally off-topic:

(When he first came to this forum - from the MRQ one - he described this place as "too civilized", btw !)

It no longer is. And I am not referring to our disputes, which stay away from personal insult, but to other "debates" that have degenerated lately. A pity, I like feuds, but not personal attacks.

Finally, did anyone notice that the MRQ forum is now way, way less active than this forum, despite the fact that there are always new products coming out for the RQ line? Hmm, this is interesting

If this was a movie, its name would be

Revenge of the Beetle! >:->

[frogspawner]

Windows Vista (not to mention its predecessors) provides undisputable evidence of the fact that you are wrong (and note that this shows how the market works, not how it should work.

Now that is a particularly twisted market - we don't want to go that way! (And let us salute the Mac-users among us... )

Finally, did anyone notice that the MRQ forum is now way, way less active than this forum, despite the fact that there are always new products coming out for the RQ line?

Not me - ain't been there for ages. Yes, very interesting...

[danbuter]

I'd recommend Mongoose Runequest, which you can check out for free on their website, as it is OGL. They have a ton of good supplements out to support it, as well.

Of course, the politics on this board have most people crying about how Mongoose destroyed Runequest...

[soltakss]

I've just recently gotten into BRP via CoC and I love it. Wish I would have gotten into this system long ago. I've been looking through past threads here and doing a little research elsewhere about RuneQuest but there is just so much out there it's a little overwhelming.

There is a lot out there, but that's because the world of Glorantha has been written about for a long time.

I am interested in introducing RQ to my group later so right now I'm on a fact finding mission and my first question is, just where in the hell does one start? What book would you recommend to a first time RQ user? What's the difference between RQ and MRQ? I've seen so much out there online that I'm not sure where to dig in at. Any advice would be appreciated.

Other people have summarised the history of RQ and MRQ, so I won't bother.

If you want to introduce RQ to a gaming group then I would start with the RQM SRD which is available on-line for free. That would then be your basic Rules Set.

You could find RQ2 or RQ3 via eBay or a local games shop and buy those, but then you are tied in to old systems that are out of print and unsupported.

As to what setting to run, that's where it gets a bit difficult.

I am a huge fan of Glorantha and have played it for 25 years, so I am biased in its favour.

Third Age Prax is probably my favourite setting and if you go down that route then there are large numbers of supplements that cover the area. Pavis and the Big Rubble and the Borderlands reprint cover most of Prax. If you can get hold of River of Cradles, Strangers in Prax, Shadows on the Borderlands and Sun County then you have a load of extra scenarios that you could use in a large, and I mean large, campaign arc that will take you years to complete.

Second Age Glorantha is what Mongoose are covering at the moment. It is good and the supplements are getting better and better, but it isn't as good a setting as Third Age, in my opinion. No area is covered in depth and it looks as though there will be more supplements about different areas and none covering the same area in more depth. I like depth, so this is a problem for me. If you want a setting that you can play in once or twice then depth isn't a problem and you should look at the Mongoose supplements.

Blood of Orlanth is a good scenario arc setting EWF against Jrusteli. Dara Happa Stirs is a good scenario arc setting a Solar Empire against the EWF. Are any of them good as a starting setting? I don't know, perhaps. But, after you have finished the scenario arc, what do you do next? Write your own scenarios?

If you don't like Glorantha, or want to get involved in published non-Gloranthan settings then the choices are a lot less limited.

Alternate Earth is a setting that has been lauded but never really delivered, RQ-wise. RQ3 had Land of Ninja and Vikings. Land of Ninja was OK, but I don't know of anyone who really used it except as a one-ff gaming resource. Vikings was better and had the advantage that it linked in to different eras of medieval Europe. But, there were no follow-up supplements so you'd have to write your own things to carry on. Recently, Mongoose have brought out Land of the Samurai and Pirates and Paolo has brought out Stupor Mundi. Land of Samurai is good but will there be any follo-up supplements? Pirates is excellent but lacks scenarios. Stupor Mundi is good and has a couple of scenarios but lacks follow-ups.

So, I would plump for Third Age Pavis/Prax as a setting for the following reasons:

1. You can use the Mongoose SRD as the basis of your rules for free and can use 90% of the old material without much effort.

2. You can buy 2 supplements that I think are in print or are fairly easily available, and that gives you a massive games resource.

3. Pavis/Prax is fairly easy to understand and gives you a lolt of depth that you can use if you want to.

4. Pavis and the Big Rubble has a lot of introductoty scenarios and Borderlands is one big introductory setting.

5. There is a lot of RQ material on-line supporting Pavis/Prax and it's all free.

[soltakss]

If you want to wait for BRP fantasy supplements then there will be supplements based on Rome and Vikings out soon, or fairly soon. They would make good game settings.

But they are not out yet.

[lawrence.whitaker]

Okay, I'll bite.

I'm not going to waste time justifying why I think Frogspawner and Paolo are wrong in their various assertions that MRQ is X% worse than BRP/RQ1/RQ2/RQ3 or whatever, because its essentially a pretty pointless argument. Its your choice. But I would encourage anyone reading this thread to actually compare the systems for themselves (and the MRQ SRD offers a free basis to do that) and reach their own conclusions rather than accepting blanket assertions that one is X% crappier than the other. There's a lot of system snobbery on this forum, and its not exactly pretty or helpful to those who genuinely want to know which system will suit their particular playing style.

Soltakss writes:

No area is covered in depth and it looks as though there will be more supplements about different areas and none covering the same area in more depth. I like depth, so this is a problem for me. If you want a setting that you can play in once or twice then depth isn't a problem and you should look at the Mongoose supplements.

and

Blood of Orlanth is a good scenario arc setting EWF against Jrusteli. Dara Happa Stirs is a good scenario arc setting a Solar Empire against the EWF. Are any of them good as a starting setting? I don't know, perhaps. But, after you have finished the scenario arc, what do you do next? Write your own scenarios?

Jrustela, Clanking City and Dara Happa Stirs are all very detailed books that will sustain lots of prolonged play - if GMs are prepared to put in some work for themselves. Whilst people are wrapped in the cosy warmth of Nostalgia for Griffin Mountain, Pavis and Borderlands, I'd suggest people actually take a good look at these old classics (I've got 'em, BTW, and am very fond of them). I don't think any are half as detailed as people actually think them to be. For their time, they were, and they without doubt broke new ground, but if you scratch beneath the surface, the detail there is quite thin. And, if you want to continue playing in these regions, then yes, GMs are going to have to write their own scenarios.

That sounds like heresy to some people (on this forum and elsewhere). People certainly seem to consider it so for some weird reason. I don't understand it. Any setting book is there to convey a place in enough detail to let you understand it and inspire GMs to create their own campaigns. Dara Happa Stirs, for example, provides about 100 pages on background, history and description that should work in precisely this way. It also includes a campaign that offers detailed single scenarios, and ongoing campaign arc, and a broad-brush extended campaign outline that allows GM-written scenarios (inspired by the background material or elsewhere) to be dropped into it. So I really don't understand Soltakss's comment that 'No area is covered in depth' or 'and none covering the same area in more depth.' I'll tell you now: no RPG company can afford to devote a huge amount of resource to continually developing and deepening one small part of a wider setting like Glorantha to the exclusion of other areas. It might be what one GM wants, but a games company has to consider a wider market. Mongoose could develop Dara Happa to the 'nth degree, but it would be at the expense of Fronela, Ralios, Seshnela, Pamaltela... the list goes on. Its a damned if you do, damned if you don't argument for Mongoose or any roleplaying company. If a line or setting is to survive, it requires both breadth and depth. I think Mongoose does a very good job of achieving that. It has a small team of dedicated writers that want to achieve that balance because they're gamers too and actively play in these settings.

So yes, the point is precisely that Mongoose has created books that aim to inspire GMs to write their own scenarios and give them the tools to do it. I reckon its successful too. Sure, I'm biased. But I also write this from the position of having written a fair chunk of published roleplaying material and knowing the effort and scope that has to go into it.

At some point in his career, a GM is going to be faced with the task of having to write or think-up his own stuff. No RPG company will keep spoon-feeding him with scenarios for just one area ad-infinitum. Its just not commercially sensible. And even if it was, isn't it better to provide the tools for GMs to create their own works? I know that many GMs don't like or feel confident in writing their own scenarios, which is why writers like me continually try to offer a whole slew of ideas in settings books that will, hopefully, make that job easier. But ultimately, if you want to explore one region very deeply, you, as GM, are going to have do some work. The RPG company can only go so far.

Oh, and for the record, I'll be working on Fronela for RQ very soon, and am working on Pavis for HQ. Both books are aiming for precisely the balance (breadth and depth) I've been discussing above.

[Lord Twig]

Hopefully HoT is still looking through this thread and this post is not wasted.

I have been playing RQ since 1980 and have played through all the incarnations. Just a little back ground to let you know where I am coming from.

Aside from it being BRP and a fantasy setting, nothing really. Just from my reading of the forums here it seemed like "the" fantasy game for BRP and even though my group is currently going insane with CoC, I'd like to run a fantasy game in the near future. I have no interest in D&D and the d20 stuff now that I have converted to BRP, so I am really just looking for a solid fantasy game to run using the BRP system. The Glorantha setting sounds interesting, but I don't know enough about it to say that I am actually drawn to it. If there are other BRP fantasy games out there I'd be just as eager to look them over as well. Especially if it doesn't require me having to hunt them down on ebay.

This tells me that you are interested in the BRP system itself and not necessarily the setting. Great! Buy the BRP book, you won't be sorry! Or you can buy the PDF. It is slightly cheaper and you can get it immediately.

As for the setting, there is a slew of books that are coming out that you will be able to use. It sound's like some of the MRQ fans are trying to convince you that because it is already in print it is the way to go, but I would say that good things come to those that wait.

Sticking with BRP and choosing one of the new settings should give you plenty to play with and has the advantage of a superior system. One that you are already familiar with if you are playing CoC. (Make no mistake, MRQ is a different system that is just similar enough to confuse people.)

I appreciate everyone's input and help. Thanks for helping me make heads or tails of RQ. I think with what's been said, I have a little more direction on how to pursue it now, but will keep reading this thread in case something else pops up. Thanks again everyone! :thumb:

I hope this is helpful to you, even though I let my biases creep in a couple times.

[Trifletraxor]

Well, to modify my advice a bit:

- If you want to game in Glorantha, get MRQ as it's in print, and produce a lot of supplements. Expect some work with houseruling though. I will actually be gaming in MRQs 2nd Age Glorantha soon, with the Blood of Orlanth campaign, but will be using BRP rules.

- If you just want to play BRP fantasy, then get the BRP book and one of the fantasy supplements on their way (news on the front page).

SGL.

[RosenMcStern]

There's a lot of system snobbery on this forum, and its not exactly pretty or helpful to those who genuinely want to know which system will suit their particular playing style.

How true!

I am still convinced that dropping general Hit Points was a bad move, and my opinion about physical runes is, ahem, very well known. But this is just my personal opinion, and whether it is shared by the majority or not it does not matter. I will continue to support RuneQuest (and as I said elsewhere, with RuneQuest I mean the in-print version, no matter how much I loved the old ones) like I did so far. Even though I am more happy with BRP, rules-wise.

But, as I said above, this site is also "The Revenge of the Beetle", so expect some unmoderated criticism against your company here, Loz.

Stupor Mundi is good and has a couple of scenarios but lacks follow-ups.

Have faith. Playtesting of Episode 2 is in progress. And in fact there is a follow-up in the download section of this site.

[Trifletraxor]

It no longer is. And I am not referring to our disputes, which stay away from personal insult, but to other "debates" that have degenerated lately. A pity, I like feuds, but not personal attacks.

I agree with this one. (:eek:)

If anyone finds themselves wanting to break netiquette and use personal attacks, please consider using the "ignore" function which you can find in your User CP.

Finally, did anyone notice that the MRQ forum is now way, way less active than this forum, despite the fact that there are always new products coming out for the RQ line? Hmm, this is interesting

If this was a movie, its name would be

Revenge of the Beetle! >:->

Here's the trailer:

YouTube - Serene: a coleopterous lipogram in a, i, o and u.

SGL.

[lawrence.whitaker]

But, as I said above, this site is also "The Revenge of the Beetle", so expect some unmoderated criticism against your company here, Loz.

I've no problem with criticism, unmoderated or otherwise, but if criticism is to be taken seriously, and to appear constructive, then it really needs to be fair, supported by facts and evidence and not simply unqualified opinion and general system snobbery. Dismissing MRQ as X% crappier than something else requires something to qualify that statement. Dismissing MRQ's output as substandard is every bit as bad, especially if you haven't bothered to read that output and assess it properly. You might not like the way MRQ handles certain things, or spot faults in it that have an impact on your game or playing style, but that doesn't automatically mean that game doesn't have merits in other areas. And, if you haven't read supporting material that's been produced, how can you possibly comment on its standard? Hearsay and personal prejudice against the parent company just aren't convincing arguments.

I'm not attempting to defend the company that pays my wages - just to point out that pretty much every game system has merits and flaws and its a question of assessing those on their merits in relation to what you're seeking to do with the system. There's plenty about MRQ I'm not personally happy with or like. But the same is true for BRP, CoC, RQ2, Bushido, HeroQuest, D20... And, ultimately, any roleplaying system is a framework. Don't like something? Change it. Like a combination of different things from different systems? Combine 'em. But arguments like 'X is a 90% better than Y period...' or 'everything produced for system X is substandard' is just snobbery. And snobbery never informs.

As to whether or not BRP Central is 'Revenge of the Beetle'... I sincerely hope it isn't. I'd always seen it as a place to discuss BRP in a civilised, constructive way: and that means BRP in all its forms. The site certainly succeeds to a certain extent, but the level of unmitigated system snobbery that pervades is highly disheartening, as are the attacks that occasionally get levelled. I still recall the extensive and disheartening thread that caused Jason Durall to decide to withdraw a few months ago. I can see this thread going in a similar direction. I hope it won't. I like hanging around here and I think BRP needs a discussion forum. But I hope that the forum will reflect the kinds of values BRP has at its core: common-sense, pragmatism, flexibility and open-mindedness. When it doesn't, it saddens me considerably.

Sorry for my rant. Please feel free to move this post to its own thread because it actually doesn't help answer the very reasonable questions posed by the OP.

[Simlasa]

personal prejudice against the parent company

Yep, that's the line I'm standing in...

[RosenMcStern]

As to whether or not BRP Central is 'Revenge of the Beetle'... I sincerely hope it isn't. I'd always seen it as a place to discuss BRP in a civilised, constructive way: and that means BRP in all its forms.

It was just a joke. "The Beetle" himself got the mood of my comment and posted the trailer above. A pity I cannot access YouTube, I am a big fan of beetles.

Still, it is true that this forum is now much more active than the official MRQ forum, and debates about that system take place here rather than there. If Matthew Sprange did not notice this, I suggest you tell him. I noticed that the Powers at Mongoose Pub. usually learn from their mistakes instead of negating them, so this could provide some valuable info. Assuming this was their fault, which is yet to be proved.

The site certainly succeeds to a certain extent, but the level of unmitigated system snobbery that pervades is highly disheartening, as are the attacks that occasionally get levelled.

I agree that some arguments should be moderated, but I prefer reading unpleasant comments to seeing people silenced. The worst point in the flame wa- er, the debates that went on on the MRQ forum was when Trif was banned for criticism. This really pissed me off. Really. Abuse and insult should not be tolerated, but complaint is fine, however annoying it might be - if you do not agree, just hit the "Ignore" button. Luckily Matt & co. realized it was a mistake and the bans and thread deletion stopped. It has to be said that they correct their mistakes when they spot one.

:focus:

So, Hound of Tindalos, if you are still tuned, now you know that RQ2 was incredibly fantastic and you should really try it out if you feel like collecting old games. The same goes for RQ3. But if you do not like dust on your manuals, Mongoose RuneQuest and Second Age Glorantha is worth a try, too. Both will need some tweak to adapt to BRP. And I would recommend keeping the setting and converting the rules to BRP in both cases.

Is it all?

[frogspawner]

I am still convinced that dropping general Hit Points was a bad move, and my opinion about physical runes is, ahem, very well known.

I agree (assuming your opinion of MRQ's Physical Runes is that they are a bad idea). Fancy that! :shocked:

Here's the trailer:

YouTube - Serene: a coleopterous lipogram in a, i, o and u.

At risk of appearing unqualifiedly critical or just generally snobby - that 'trailer' is 100% daft! (A laugh, though...)

I've no problem with criticism, unmoderated or otherwise, but if criticism is to be taken seriously, and to appear constructive, then it really needs to be fair, supported by facts and evidence and not simply unqualified opinion and general system snobbery.

I did say I'd only read the MRQ SRD, so I trust Mr Tindalos is able to properly judge the value of my criticisms. I didn't say everything Mongoose publish is bad - just their rules - and that I won't be buying the other stuff. I have no interest in the 2nd-age setting. And, although I'm sure you can manage it with a lot of hard work (and maybe you have, I'll never know), but it must be difficult to produce good setting material for a poor rules system - especially since some of the poor design affects the wider world (particularly their runes-as-physical-objects mistake).

I didn't want to bore Hound with point-by-point evidence qualifying why true RQ/BRP is better than the Mongoose rules. So MRQ being 90% worse is just an estimate. Since you want facts, I'll go through the MRQ SRD and get an accurate figure sometime - but not today, and probably not this week. (I'm busy, setting up a game under rules which use the best bits from BRP, RQ2/3, RoleMaster, C&S, Dragon Warriors, AD&D1&2, D&D3.x - I'm no rules snob - but nothing from MRQ). Hound of Tindalos just wanted opinions of where it's best to start, so I told him...

...RQ2.

[NickMiddleton]

If there are other BRP fantasy games out there I'd be just as eager to look them over as well. Especially if it doesn't require me having to hunt them down on ebay.

Ashes to Ashes is out in PDF, and soon to be in print I believe. Cthulhu: Dark Ages might appeal, and has some excellent support material available in monograph form (print & PDF).

Further support in the fantasy vein is definitely on its way: I'm working on something, plus there's Pete Nash's Rome and some of the other stuff that's been announced: see the front page of this site.

I appreciate everyone's input and help. Thanks for helping me make heads or tails of RQ. I think with what's been said, I have a little more direction on how to pursue it now, but will keep reading this thread in case something else pops up. Thanks again everyone! :thumb:

Just don't let the fact that some of us are crusty old grognards and argue about things at the drop of a metaphorical hat put you off!

Cheers,

Nick

[Trifletraxor]

I've no problem with criticism, unmoderated or otherwise, but if criticism is to be taken seriously, and to appear constructive, then it really needs to be fair, supported by facts and evidence and not simply unqualified opinion and general system snobbery.

Well, a lot of us saw Mongoose as RuneQuest new salvation, and I have personally invested in 4 rule books, 5 setting books, GM screen and a scenario. Unfortunately, for me and many others, the rules were a big disappointment, and several of the setting books suffered a lot from being subjected to editors with no knowledge of Glorantha whatsoever.

Game x being 100 times better than game y is clearly just a personal opinion, and shouldn't be taken as anything else. Most of the constructive criticism have been given allready, on the MRQ forum. The setting however, looks like it's improving. So, while I'll never use the MRQ rulebooks, I will be starting up a 2nd Age campaign in a couple of weeks.

SGL.

[Hound of Tindalos]

So, Hound of Tindalos, if you are still tuned, now you know that RQ2 was incredibly fantastic and you should really try it out if you feel like collecting old games. The same goes for RQ3. But if you do not like dust on your manuals, Mongoose RuneQuest and Second Age Glorantha is worth a try, too. Both will need some tweak to adapt to BRP. And I would recommend keeping the setting and converting the rules to BRP in both cases.

Is it all?

Oh yeah, I'm still tuned. Didn't realize I was opening up such a large can of worms with my original question.

I didn't want to bore Hound with point-by-point evidence qualifying why true RQ/BRP is better than the Mongoose rules. So MRQ being 90% worse is just an estimate. Since you want facts, I'll go through the MRQ SRD and get an accurate figure sometime - but not today, and probably not this week. (I'm busy, setting up a game under rules which use the best bits from BRP, RQ2/3, RoleMaster, C&S, Dragon Warriors, AD&D1&2, D&D3.x - I'm no rules snob - but nothing from MRQ). Hound of Tindalos just wanted opinions of where it's best to start, so I told him...

...RQ2.

Not bored at all. I appreciate everyone's input so far. :thumb:

Ashes to Ashes is out in PDF, and soon to be in print I believe. Cthulhu: Dark Ages might appeal, and has some excellent support material available in monograph form (print & PDF).

Further support in the fantasy vein is definitely on its way: I'm working on something, plus there's Pete Nash's Rome and some of the other stuff that's been announced: see the front page of this site.

Just don't let the fact that some of us are crusty old grognards and argue about things at the drop of a metaphorical hat put you off!

Cheers,

Nick

I'll check those out as well. And no, I'm not put off. This has been an interesting thread and it's cool to see so many here with some passion for their games. Not really having a dog in this fight as to which version is best, it's apparent to me that RQ (whichever version) has got to be a good game considering the amount and nature of the responses this thread has gained.

Thanks everyone!

Hound

[Aycorn]

Yes, this has been a good thread, and I appreciate Rosenstern's articulating his/her argument, even though I might split hairs over the term "dated" (but I won't). Also that it's been civil.

:lol:

[rust]

I'd always seen it as a place to discuss BRP in a civilised, constructive way: and that means BRP in all its forms. The site certainly succeeds to a certain extent, but the level of unmitigated system snobbery that pervades is highly disheartening, as are the attacks that occasionally get levelled.

Ah, well ... people are likely to show some passion when it comes to their

favourite games... and I think it is far more passion than "snobbery" ...

Still, of all the major RPG forums I have seen there is only one where I would

call the discussions more "civilised" and "constructive", and where "attacks"

are even more rare than here. :thumb:

But now, sorry and: :focus: