Jump to content
MOB

RUNEQUEST is available for purchase NOW!

Recommended Posts

So, I pops on to my fave place to visit these daze on da net, a little blurry eyed and tired and as my peepers sweep by the unread post what opens my bleeding eyeballs to full y'all ask? Well might ya at that... So as I eyeball the screen thinking this is mighty familiar—as I reach for my wallet, cursing a blue streak that would make Uzuz blush...

RUNEQUEST is available for purchase NOW!

says the screen....

‘bout friggin time I’ve only been waithng for a... starts to say I.

Wait a sec, as the fog slowly begins to lift...

Holy déjà vu Batman!

Gute nacht all!

Edited by Bill the barbarian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/2/2019 at 4:03 PM, PhilHibbs said:

I know I'm being a scratched record, but it's now 6 months from release and we still don't have PDFs that match the final printed product. We still have a PDF that says this for augments:

image.png.30817ac63964c0272e309adc78ec26b8.png

I promise that I won't harp on about this any more... not until 9 months or a year has passed anyway.

Dammit, I missed the 9 month anniversary. Oh well, I can wait until April before raising this again.

On 10/3/2019 at 7:15 AM, Crel said:

Silly Phil, don't you know that subtracting a negative gets you a bonus? ;)

So it's all the others that are wrong? Ok that makes sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sing this while washing your hands.

Happy birthday GM Screen,
Happy birthday GM Screen,
Happy birthday GM Screen...

Can we get an updated PDF pleeeeease!

🤣

Edited by PhilHibbs
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, PhilHibbs said:

Can we get an updated PDF pleeeeease!

 

So sorry Mr. Hibbs, just sang that and must note that the prescribed lyrics are insufficient. As this would only take 10 seconds, I recommend not only repeating this once more, but I strongly recommend adding. “🎶and many mooooooorrrrrrre!”, just to be sure.

Your barbaric source of non-fake Covid-19 info
smiling bill

Edited by Bill the barbarian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/9/2020 at 3:28 PM, PhilHibbs said:

Can we get an updated PDF pleeeeease!

GM Screen Pack on Chaosium.com and DTRPG files updated - please head over to your respective accounts and download.

New files end in 1.0.1 and contain minor text fixes:

  • Calendar, Orlanth & Odayla Holy days 32 -> 39
  • GM Reference, Skill Augments table, success -20 -> +20
  • Adventurer Sheet, Armor & Hit Locations, Shield, PARRY -> SKILL
Edited by Scotty
GM Screen Pack
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/11/2020 at 2:22 AM, Scotty said:

GM Screen Pack on Chaosium.com and DTRPG files updated - please head over to your respective accounts and download.

New files end in 1.0.1 and contain minor text fixes:

  • Calendar, Orlanth & Odayla Holy days 32 -> 39
  • GM Reference, Skill Augments table, success -20 -> +20
  • Adventurer Sheet, Armor & Hit Locations, Shield, PARRY -> SKILL

Thanks Scott.

@Scotty or @MOB, regarding RQG itself, is there any plans to incorporate the errata/important clarifications to the PDF?

Any plans for a 3rd printing soon (with ncorporate the errata/important clarifications) or are you guys still full stocked on 2nd printing?

Edited by DreadDomain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/9/2020 at 1:44 PM, DreadDomain said:

Thanks Scott.

@Scotty or @MOB, regarding RQG itself, is there any plans to incorporate the errata/important clarifications to the PDF?

Any plans for a 3rd printing soon (with ncorporate the errata/important clarifications) or are you guys still full stocked on 2nd printing?

Simple "errata" -- typo's, etc -- got incorporated into the 2nd printing.  I think a few more have been spotted since, but not many.  Presumably they will go into a 3rd printing, but I think that's still a while out (but only Chaosium would know).

The "important clarifications" is -- very often -- a MUCH more complex issue.  It takes only a small amount of text added or removed, before the flow of the text is broken, widows and orphans introduced, boxed-text sections split from the inline-text they belong beside, etc etc etc.   Basically, the chapter has to go back to layout / pre-publication.

I'm not holding my breath.

Mind you, I'd welcome it!

But the asphyxiation would be fatal, and I wouldn't be able to enjoy the "revised printing."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, g33k said:

But the asphyxiation would be fatal, and I wouldn't be able to enjoy the "revised printing."

Rules for asphyxiation can be found on p.156 of RQG.

!i!

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they printed lots of the second printing. Really, really large amounts.

One example of the text flow problems can be seen in the last line of page 375 and the list on 377. The introduction to the list is separated from the list itself, it used to be immediately above the list which was a more natural place for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Ian Absentia said:

Rules for asphyxiation can be found on p.156 of RQG.

!i!

TYVM Ian.

I am drowning in your helpfulness.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote

The "important clarifications" is -- very often -- a MUCH more complex issue.  It takes only a small amount of text added or removed, before the flow of the text is broken, widows and orphans introduced, boxed-text sections split from the inline-text they belong beside, etc etc etc.   Basically, the chapter has to go back to layout / pre-publication.

Yes, of course. I am not waiting for or expecting a rewrite/revision that would require going back to layout. There are still quite a few listed in the second printing errata. It is still a full two pages covering over 30 clarifications which often are simple rewording or addition and subtraction of words. Even elements of the Rune Fixes could easily be incorporated. But I take your point onboard that "could easily be incorporated" is often not so easy.

7 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

I think they printed lots of the second printing. Really, really large amounts.

Yes, I suspect that the wait might be very long (this is why I would like @Scotty, @MOB or @Rick Meints to give us an update in the form of "don't hold your breath we have plenty of 2nd printing in the warehouses", "don't hold your breath, the next printing won't change because we are focusing on other things" or "2nd printing is running low so we might look at it in the future but no promise". It is just that for such a beautiful book, I'd rather have a version that is a bit more polished. Lately I had a itch to buy the slipcase but I have been holding off buy the physical core book for a long while now (has it been out for 2 years already!?) 

EDIT: Hang on, I just realized that the Errata for the second printing I was looking at was actually what was incorporated in the second printing (I assume since the PDF has been updated accordingly). I was sure there was a errata for the second printing floating around (Two-weapon use is still wrong in the second printing) but I am clearly looking at the wrong thing... Or maybe the errata is now what is currently in the Rune Fixes?

Edited by DreadDomain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, DreadDomain said:

EDIT: Hang on, I just realized that the Errata for the second printing I was looking at was actually what was incorporated in the second printing (I assume since the PDF has been updated accordingly). I was sure there was a errata for the second printing floating around (Two-weapon use is still wrong in the second printing) but I am clearly looking at the wrong thing... Or maybe the errata is now what is currently in the Rune Fixes?

There's three things that I am aware of.

Differences between first and second printing, Rick put this together as a PDF.

Rune Fixes 1, Rune Fixes 2

Jason's Q&A which has mostly been collected at the Well of Daliath

I have replaced the content of the "Areas of Doubt and Uncertainty" page on the RQG Wiki with this summary. Initially I intended that page to be a place to collate and organize the answers, but The Well of Daliath does that much better than I ever could have.

Edited by PhilHibbs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

There's three things that I am aware of.

Differences between first and second printing, Rick put this together as a PDF.

This is the one I was confusing with an errata of the Second Printing rather than what was corrected in the second printing. 

7 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

Rune Fixes 1, Rune Fixes 2

Jason's Q&A which has mostly been collected at the Well of Daliath

I have replaced the content of the "Areas of Doubt and Uncertainty" page on the RQG Wiki with this summary. Initially I intended that page to be a place to collate and organize the answers, but The Well of Daliath does that much better than I ever could have.

Incorporating (some of the) the Rune Fixes would be great instead of having PDFs floating around but I don't quite expect it.

As for the Well of Daliath, while I definitely appreciate the resource, it is very difficult to go through. It is simply a collection of copy paste answers some directly contradicting one another. It's definitely better than going through the Q&A thread!

Thanks. I guess, I have now no more hope of a better cleaned-up RQG :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, DreadDomain said:

As for the Well of Daliath, while I definitely appreciate the resource, it is very difficult to go through.

If someone can suggest a better structure, it can change.

Quote

It is simply a collection of copy paste answers some directly contradicting one another.

If the contradictory answers can be highlighted, I can look at changing this. Please be aware this takes a lot of time to maintain. So it may not happen immediately.

Edited by Scotty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Scotty said:

If someone can suggest a better structure, it can change.

Actually, I believe the structure is quite good. It's the editing of the questions and answers that are lacking (straight copy paste from the thread). It would take someone to go through it and clean it up, which is not a trivial task.

Quote

If the contradictory answers can be highlighted, I can look at changing this. Please be aware this takes a lot of time to maintain. So it may not happen immediately.

Just two examples under Two Weapon Use (because I happened to look at if this one was clarified).

----------------------------------------

Two Weapon Use Contradiction number one

First Statement:

"First bullet changed to “…may use them for two attacks or attacking with one and parrying with the other, as desired.” (Part of Second printing corrections)"

Even if this is in the Second printing, this is not quite correct.

Second Statement (further down the same section)

"With two weapons, one in each hand you can attack with both (subject to strike ranks), and parry with both (though only 1 parry allowed per attack) and subsequent parries (in a combat round) are subject to the -20% cumulative penalty, regardless of which weapon is used to parry."

This statement is correct.

Two Weapon Use Contradiction number two

First Statement (from Rune Fixes 2 and added to the Well of Daliath):

"The off-hand chance begins at either half its normal chance (if the adventurer has that skill) or the weapon’s base chance plus the skill category modifier."

This statement is correct.

Second Statement (further down the same section)

"[Question] When learning a weapon offhand, the base is 05%, but is it possible to use the half normal chance, as it is another skill with a weapon in the same category?

[Answer] It’s up to your gamemaster but I would say absolutely not."

This answer is incorrect.

---------------------------------------

Hopefully I happened to read the section that is contradictory and most of the rest is ok but it highlights that the Q&A needs an editorial pass to clean it up and make it more usable but also to collect what could eventually be in a third printing. 

Edited by DreadDomain
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've corrected the sections you've pointed out and added some additional clarifying text. I've had a quick edit of the whole page a well, fixing some Broken links too.

 

  • Thanks 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Scotty said:

I've corrected the sections you've pointed out and added some additional clarifying text. I've had a quick edit of the whole page a well, fixing some Broken links too.

 

Thanks Scotty, that was quick!

Might I suggest this is still not quite correct and one statement still directly contradicts another?

-------------------------------------

Two Weapon Use correction

First Statement:

"Two Weapon Use (page 224)

First bullet changed to “…may use them for two attacks or attacking with one and parrying with the other, as desired.” (Part of Second printing corrections). Please note that this has been superseded by Rune Fixes 2 below."

The last sentence is not quite correct. The second statement below does not come from the Rune Fixes 2. It comes from the Q&A thread.

Second Statement (further down the same section)

"With two weapons, one in each hand you can attack with both (subject to strike ranks), and parry with both (though only 1 parry allowed per attack) and subsequent parries (in a combat round) are subject to the -20% cumulative penalty, regardless of which weapon is used to parry.

Worth repeating.

End of Rune Fixes 2."

The "End of the Rune Fixes 2" comment should come before the statement as this statement is not in Rune Fixes 2 (as indicated above, it comes from the Q&A thread.) Unless of course you intend to update Rune Fixes 2 to include it. As a note, "Worth repeating" should be deleted. It doesn't bring anything.

To clarify, I would suggest the following change to the Well of Daliath and I would mark it as an errata for a third printing:

"Two Weapon Use (page 224)

Part of Second Printing Correction, first bullet changed to...“…may use them for two attacks or attacking with one and parrying with the other, as desired.” This correction has now been superseded and the first bullet is changed to: "With two weapons, one in each hand you can attack with both (subject to strike ranks), and parry with both (though only 1 parry allowed per attack) and subsequent parries (in a combat round) are subject to the -20% cumulative penalty, regardless of which weapon is used to parry."

Off-Hand skill contradiction

First Statement (from Rune Fixes 2 and added to the Well of Daliath):

"The off-hand chance begins at either half its normal chance (if the adventurer has that skill) or the weapon’s base chance plus the skill category modifier."

This statement is correct and is supported by RQG page 225.

Second Statement (further down the same section, which you edited)

"[Question] When learning a weapon offhand, the base is 05%, but is it possible to use the half normal chance, as it is another skill with a weapon in the same category?

[Answer] No.

Learning to do something in your “off” hand isn’t simply making similar movements with something slightly different in your hand, it’s writing all new motions and habits, which is a lot more difficult. 

Think of it as the difference between switching from cursive to printing to calligraphy (same group) vs trying to write with your left hand."

This statement is incorrect (the answer should be "yes") and the whole section is in direct contradiction with the first statement from Rune Fixes 2 and with RQG p.225. For clarity and to avoid redundant questions and answers, I would delete the whole second statement from the Well of Daliath.

Thanks!

Edited by DreadDomain
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/11/2020 at 10:30 PM, DreadDomain said:

Yes, I suspect that the wait might be very long (this is why I would like @Scotty, @MOB or @Rick Meints to give us an update in the form of "don't hold your breath we have plenty of 2nd printing in the warehouses", "don't hold your breath, the next printing won't change because we are focusing on other things" or "2nd printing is running low so we might look at it in the future but no promise". It is just that for such a beautiful book, I'd rather have a version that is a bit more polished. Lately I had a itch to buy the slipcase but I have been holding off buy the physical core book for a long while now (has it been out for 2 years already!?) 

We have enough stock of the RQ rulebook that we probably won't be reprinting it until some time in 2021. Every time we reprint a book we usually update it for typos and other corrections.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Rick Meints said:

We have enough stock of the RQ rulebook that we probably won't be reprinting it until some time in 2021. Every time we reprint a book we usually update it for typos and other corrections.

TYVM, Rick!

(as usual, living up to your .sig!)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Rick Meints said:

We have enough stock of the RQ rulebook that we probably won't be reprinting it until some time in 2021. Every time we reprint a book we usually update it for typos and other corrections.

Thanks Rick, that is very useful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are very happy to learn that three Chaosium titles have been shortlisted in the 2020 UK Games Expo Awards. 

RuneQuest Roleplaying in Glorantha Slipcase Set and Paladin - Warriors of Charlemagne have both been nominated for Best Role-Playing Game.

Berlin the Wicked City has been shortlisted for Best Role-Playing Expansion.

Congratulations to all the creative teams behind these exceptional releases!

The winners will be announced at UKGE's VirtuallyEXPO, on August 21-23.

1210197850_UKGENomsfor2020.png.ccc6acd4f8551eb399f30b96cec2cf01.png

  • Like 9

Share this post


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.

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...