OpenQuest Refresh in 2017

[Simlasa]

10 hours ago, Mankcam said:

 Sometimes I want something to play akin to the Fighting Fantasy gamebooks or the early classic Basic D&D scenarios, with the flavour of Dungeon Crawl Classics, using a intutive D100% skill mechanic. I think OQ is the closest way to do this with the BRP engine.

This is something I've been aiming for myself... playing lots of DCC has me wanting to drag that flavor into Magic World/Openquest. Simpler but wilder, with lots of random tables full of crazy possibilities. Borrowing flavor/scenarios/setting bits from Warhammer, Dragon Warriors, and Lamentations of the Flame Princess as well.

[Mankcam]

MW is also quite good for what we are describing, the char gen is simple, and it plays smoothly. In many ways MW could really be a good fit for gonzo old school D&D type games. I see OQ in a similar realm, but perhaps would like it to be even more simple than what it is now, only just slightly more complex than Fighting Fantasy (I am interested in seeing what Newt is thinking regarding his ideas on SimpleQuest).

Although I'm still happy with OQ in it's current form, don't get me wrong about that 

Keeping a different flavour and complexity to MW and OQ keeps them in different niches, and not moving into the more serious territory of RQ and Mythras works for me, as this really appeals to a different kind of game play.

I am quite a big time Glorantha, Hyboria, and Middle Earth fan, and converting or playing these with a mix of RQ/BGB rules has been my tabletop mainstay for many years.

However sometimes I just want to crack open a beer and crack a few goblin heads without rolling hit locations or worrying about the plausibility of the setting, or the nature of it's mythos, or inner workings of its pathos, or whatever. Just to be in junior high again heh heh

Edited May 7, 2017 by Mankcam

[Sunwolfe]

Newt, Mankcam, Simlasa and sundry,

I am so stoked about this "refresh," I just have to make a few more comments. Feel free to ignore me, gentle reader, if my gushing happiness that yet another game I've invested myself into is NOT going the way of the Dodo embarrasses you.

It's fascinating and gratifying to me that even though our reasons and approaches differ, even though we produce individually unique game results, we're all satisfied with the same game mechanic (Newt, I know we're but a small sampling, but, if you ever needed more confirmation than you already have...:-)! I came OQ (following MW) for its simplicity and the room it gave me and my players to role-play without an overabundance of dice-rolling, book consultation or conflict resolution flavors to learn. Mankcam, some of the things OQ affords you a break from when you're settling in to leisurely, "...crack a few goblin heads... :-)"--setting plausibility, the nature of its mythos and the world's inner workings--are the very things my players complained that rules-heavy versions of BRP (in all fairness I must admit: as I employed them) had gotten in the way of.

My setting has been ongoing for almost four decades now. Over time, with each iteration of BRP, layers of mechanics had settled on it like sediment until my game was damn near fossilized. For example, almost no one wanted to play a magic user so burgeoning had the process of spell casting become, and combat was like watching a slow tennis match. I was guilty of Rules-Creep in the first degree and nobody was having "...junior high..."-like fun. After some soul and system searching, I concluded the SQ/OQ model was the best fit for me and my crew.

My setting is more Sword, Sandal and Divinity than it is Sword, Sorcery and High Fantasy (think linothorax, horse hair corinthian helmets and god-touched avatars rather than chainmail habergeons, sponges helms and fire-breathing dragons--though Howard and Leiber have surely been an influence), where simple Dungeon Crawling, though not unknown, is quite rare. Even so, SQ/OQ still fits my game...as well as, low and behold, Mankcam's old school gonzo goodness!  Even though I don't use a lot of "...random tables full of crazy possibilities..." as Simlasa's OQ does--OQ still fits our games Tah-dah!. Even though my games are more about marching armies, city-state skullduggery and religious fanatics than evil sorcerers, nesting monsters and treasure hunting, which OQ does well--SQ/OQ still fits our games.

And I just want to say, I bloody well LOVE that and think it's awesome!

There...I'm good now.

Seriously though, Newt, thanks for keeping this a living game and not letting it go.

Cheers, mates!

[Newt]

Thanks for posting that Sunwolfe.

Its kind words like this that keep me going some days with OQ, it has its tough moments, and inspired me to put asside my reservations and get on with with OQ and its 'aggressive' release schedule

[Questbird]

20 hours ago, Newt said:

Thanks for posting that Sunwolfe.

Its kind words like this that keep me going some days with OQ, it has its tough moments, and inspired me to put asside my reservations and get on with with OQ and its 'aggressive' release schedule

A friend of mine has recently decided that OpenQuest would be his game of choice for refereeing, and I bought him a copy. He ran Classic Fantasy when it was BRP but he found Mythras (CF's new home) and Revolution D100 to be too crunchy for his tastes. He considered Magic World too, but hates the name. I think OpenQuest being still in print has also influenced him. Long live OpenQuest! 

[Newt]

Its a gorgeous day here in the NW of England and to make it even better the print-proof of OpenQuest Refreshed turned up. Still some tweaks to the text to be done (which the ever gracious Guy Milner is helping out with) but the new colour art works well with DriveThru's new standard colour format (which is on heavier grade of paper than RoH and OQ2 was on), which was the main purpose of this print proof. Jon Hodgson's Heroine cover looks all dark and deadly too  

Fingers crossed it will be on the stall at UK Games Expo.

[Simlasa]

On May 7, 2017 at 10:26 PM, Questbird said:

He considered Magic World too, but hates the name.

I think that's the first time I've heard THAT as a reason for shunning a game... well, Panty Explosion probably got a similar reaction, not sure.

Either way, new OQ book looks quite nice (though I prefer the previous cover). Glad to hear it's on better paper too.

I look forward to what follows.

[rsanford]

On 5/7/2017 at 0:07 AM, Sunwolfe said:

Newt, Mankcam, Simlasa and sundry,

I am so stoked about this "refresh," I just have to make a few more comments. Feel free to ignore me, gentle reader, if my gushing happiness that yet another game I've invested myself into is NOT going the way of the Dodo embarrasses you.

It's fascinating and gratifying to me that even though our reasons and approaches differ, even though we produce individually unique game results, we're all satisfied with the same game mechanic (Newt, I know we're but a small sampling, but, if you ever needed more confirmation than you already have...:-)! I came OQ (following MW) for its simplicity and the room it gave me and my players to role-play without an overabundance of dice-rolling, book consultation or conflict resolution flavors to learn. Mankcam, some of the things OQ affords you a break from when you're settling in to leisurely, "...crack a few goblin heads... :-)"--setting plausibility, the nature of its mythos and the world's inner workings--are the very things my players complained that rules-heavy versions of BRP (in all fairness I must admit: as I employed them) had gotten in the way of.

My setting has been ongoing for almost four decades now. Over time, with each iteration of BRP, layers of mechanics had settled on it like sediment until my game was damn near fossilized. For example, almost no one wanted to play a magic user so burgeoning had the process of spell casting become, and combat was like watching a slow tennis match. I was guilty of Rules-Creep in the first degree and nobody was having "...junior high..."-like fun. After some soul and system searching, I concluded the SQ/OQ model was the best fit for me and my crew.

My setting is more Sword, Sandal and Divinity than it is Sword, Sorcery and High Fantasy (think linothorax, horse hair corinthian helmets and god-touched avatars rather than chainmail habergeons, sponges helms and fire-breathing dragons--though Howard and Leiber have surely been an influence), where simple Dungeon Crawling, though not unknown, is quite rare. Even so, SQ/OQ still fits my game...as well as, low and behold, Mankcam's old school gonzo goodness!  Even though I don't use a lot of "...random tables full of crazy possibilities..." as Simlasa's OQ does--OQ still fits our games Tah-dah!. Even though my games are more about marching armies, city-state skullduggery and religious fanatics than evil sorcerers, nesting monsters and treasure hunting, which OQ does well--SQ/OQ still fits our games.

And I just want to say, I bloody well LOVE that and think it's awesome!

There...I'm good now.

Seriously though, Newt, thanks for keeping this a living game and not letting it go.

Cheers, mates!

Gosh I wish I could play in your game! The way you describe it is awesome!

[rsanford]

2 hours ago, Simlasa said:

I think that's the first time I've heard THAT as a reason for shunning a game... well, Panty Explosion probably got a similar reaction, not sure,

Panty Explosion - you have to be kidding!

[Simlasa]

5 hours ago, rsanford said:

Panty Explosion - you have to be kidding!

Nope:

http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/108156/Panty-Explosion-Perfect

[Newt]

With that one I just have to think "its a JapRPG, it's a cultural thing"

[Mankcam]

One thing I may have liked to see with a new edition of OQ would have been a reworking of the magic not to mirror the RQ magic systems too closely.

For instance I would completely retrap Battle Magic as optional rules for cinematic Talents. I know such is suggested in the book, but I would of made Talents the default form.

Arcane Magic is reasonable with the Sorcery rules, although additional rules for Alchemy might be helpful.  However I guess that may not need to be in a core book.

Priestly Powers could be presented in the form divine abilities or theological knowledge which has practical applications of blessings, wards, pacts, and curses; and more moral/behavioural focused (however not too complex with these, the game works well unburdened),

Now that RQ2 is back and RQG is on its way, it may be good to present OQ with its own identity rather than being in RQ's shadow.

However all of these things are easy to hand wave, which is another of OQ's charms.

All in all I still think OQ is a great little toolkit for a less cluttered BRP game, making it perfect for classic dungeon crawls and superficial rollicking sword n sorcery sessions.

Edited May 11, 2017 by Mankcam

[Newt]

I did consider this, my favorite would have been to use Battle Magic as the base system with unique spells from Sorcery and Divine added to the list. But then this would broken compatibility not just with OQ's existing  adventure books but with other people's campaigns. Plus it does have a familiar charm  As said if I want to do this big change I'd do it as new game.  This is why Its a Refresh rather than a Revision of the system.

As for being in RQ's shadow that's always going to come down to personal perspective, but I see OQ now as being firmly post-RQ. Its always been there in the rules. Even in the magic systems there's a lot of difference not just in how some of the concepts are implemented but in the fact that there's a bucket load of new spells in all three approaches.  

You can also see it in the Adventure supplements I've released (Life and Death. Savage North, Crucible of Dragons) Each is its own thing. You'll see it more and more in the upcoming QO Adventure/Campaign books as we go forward.

 

 

[Questbird]

14 hours ago, Simlasa said:

I think that's the first time I've heard THAT as a reason for shunning a game... well, Panty Explosion probably got a similar reaction, not sure.

Well, Panty Explosion is funny name for a funny sounding game. GURPS, BRP, FUDGE and Magic World are supposedly more serious, but sound silly. Sometimes you just have to answer the question "What are you guys playing?" from someone who really has no idea. And those times I'd rather say 'Panty Explosion' than BRP or (in my friend's case) Magic World.

[Questbird]

14 hours ago, Simlasa said:

I think that's the first time I've heard THAT as a reason for shunning a game... well, Panty Explosion probably got a similar reaction, not sure.

Well, Panty Explosion is funny name for a funny sounding game. GURPS, BRP, FUDGE and Magic World are supposedly more serious, but sound silly. Sometimes you just have to answer the question "What are you guys playing?" from someone who really has no idea. And those times I'd rather say 'Panty Explosion' than BRP or (in my friend's case) Magic World.

[Questbird]

14 hours ago, Simlasa said:

I think that's the first time I've heard THAT as a reason for shunning a game... well, Panty Explosion probably got a similar reaction, not sure.

Well, Panty Explosion is funny name for a funny sounding game. GURPS, BRP, FUDGE and Magic World are supposedly more serious, but sound silly. Sometimes you just have to answer the question "What are you guys playing?" from someone who really has no idea. And those times I'd rather say 'Panty Explosion' than BRP or (in my friend's case) Magic World.

Ooops, there goes the forum triple post. Sorry about that.

Edited May 11, 2017 by Questbird

[jux]

The illustrations are not any better than OQ2 which is unfortunate. I like that the layout is clear, no transparent illustrations on text to make things more messy (like the new RQG).
But something of the aesthetics of the visuals that does not speak "fantasy roleplaying" to me in this product. It is very plain - very good reference manual, nothing to feels evocative.

I understand it's from an indie developer where budgets are tight, but I have seen better results with minimal art. One example would be Dragon Warriors Bestiary - just check the free preview in DTRPG:
http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/92332/Dragon-Warriors-Bestiary
Just look the artwork, fonts, tables.

I know it is not taken as constructive criticism - the design choices are already been done, which makes it useless whining, but:
 - the table borders look like I printed out something from MS Excel
 - the artwork would work better in black and white - currently the tone and style is like it's a children’s book
 - red font? I don't get it

Edited May 22, 2017 by jux

[Prime Evil]

22 hours ago, jux said:

I know it is not taken as constructive criticism - the design choices are already been done, which makes it useless whining, but:
 - the table borders look like I printed out something from MS Excel
 - the artwork would work better in black and white - currently the tone and style is like it's a children’s book
 - red font? I don't get it

How about something like the attached sample?

I've just mocked up a sample page from the OQ2 SRD for fun  

The embedded font is EB Garamond (which is available under an open license thanks to the Google Fonts project). 

Sample Page.pdf

[chiisu81]

1 hour ago, Prime Evil said:

How about something like the attached sample?

I've just mocked up a sample page from the OQ2 SRD for fun  

The embedded font is EB Garamond (which is available under an open license thanks to the Google Fonts project). 

Sample Page.pdf

To say that's an improvement is a massive understatement! 

[Mankcam]

Wow, that looks really good

[Prime Evil]

14 hours ago, Mankcam said:

Wow, that looks really good

Thanks!

I was just playing around, but I'm sure that I could convert the entire OQ SRD to this format with a bit of work. 

I'll probably wait until Newt releases the revised version though. 

I might be tempted to do a custom version with a few of my house rules...

[Sunwolfe]

On 5/24/2017 at 3:55 AM, Prime Evil said:

I might be tempted to do a custom version with a few of my house rules...

Exactly!

Indeed, I think that's what it's all for. I have done just this thing when my house revisions and additions mix with OQ rulings. Therein I have waxed silly with my Apache Open Office software and modified tables, margins, fonts, point-size and colors with abandon! Oh, the joys of desk-top editing and publishing DIY powers! I wait for no man/publisher...LOL!

Cheers!

[karask]

 

On 5/24/2017 at 1:55 PM, Prime Evil said:

I might be tempted to do a custom version with a few of my house rules...

 

I would love an editable beautified version of the SRD rules!!!  I am struggling to find time to do so myself (primarily to share with my players!)... so I would appreciate it if you can share!

Cheers!

 

 

[Whisker89]

On 3/5/2017 at 9:07 AM, Newt said:

The book is currently going through final check and should be ready in pdf by the end of May with print following shortly after.

 

The end of may is here and I've just seen on facebook that OpenQuest Refreshed will be @ UK Games Expo!

So, when will it be avaiable for us who live pretty distant from UK? can't wait to hold it in my hands (or in my pc)

[Newt]

Indeed I will have a small number of copies of OQ Refreshed at UK Games Expo, Friday - Sunday at the Birmingham National Exhibition centre, along with a handful of OpenQuest adventure books (Savage North etc).   If I have any left they will go up on my web store on Monday, with a general release via Drivethrurpg.com shortly after