I'd do it in RQ6, but DCC can be an awesome fit too.

Quote from: Imperator;823201I'd do it in RQ6, but DCC can be an awesome fit too.

I was thinking RQ6 also, but that system seems to be my go to for most fantasy I enjoy.

Quote from: Imperator;823201I'd do it in RQ6, but DCC can be an awesome fit too.

I'd myself use probably some sort of fusion between Runequest and Warhammer. Warhammer's magic'd be a better fit for the setting I think.

Re: Runequest 6 version

They did a Mongoose Runequest version. PDFs are no longer available, but you can find it second hand print.

http://rpggeek.com/rpgitem/69431/lankhmar-unleashed

DCC, no question. It was made for Lankhmar.

Quote from: Imperator;823201I'd do it in RQ6, but DCC can be an awesome fit too.

Quote from: Kravell;823304I was thinking RQ6 also, but that system seems to be my go to for most fantasy I enjoy.

+1, but then I default to RQ6 every time I'm handed a setting that D&D (or simulacra thereof) doesn't quite do straight off the box.

I remain entertained and sometimes even awed by the OSR's collective ability to twist the TSR D&D engine into new shapes, but being a lazy bum myself, I find BRP-powered fantasy games easier to customize.

And in this particular instance, well shit, there's a MRQ2 version published already.

I agree about RuneQuest 6. It seems like if you really want to emulate Lankhmar style characters, only a skill-based system will do the trick. Otherwise as soon as you want to create Fafhrd and Gray Mouser type characters you'd have to reach for multiple multi-classing from the get go. I think you'd have to use something like the Very Bad Things tables from Monster Island for magic gone haywire, and actually the Theistic magic described in that supplement fits a swords & sorcery game very well. That said, RQ doesn't have the same gonzo elements baked into the rules that DCC does. You'd have to provide the flavour yourself. But like other posters, RuneQuest is just my go to game for fantasy these days. It's easy to learn and grok, and incredibly adaptable. The Passions rules also come to mind, for acquiring a paramour or indeed a Loyalty Passion to a patron.

Quote from: The Butcher;824630And in this particular instance, well shit, there's a MRQ2 version published already.

MRQI, IIRC, but yeah, lot's been done.

Quote from: markfitz;824639That said, RQ doesn't have the same gonzo elements baked into the rules that DCC does. You'd have to provide the flavour yourself. But like other posters, RuneQuest is just my go to game for fantasy these days. It's easy to learn and grok, and incredibly adaptable. The Passions rules also come to mind, for acquiring a paramour or indeed a Loyalty Passion to a patron.

Oddly enough, the fact that Nehwon, the world where you can go to the "Death Pole" and steal something from Death's house, seems infinitely less gonzo than bog-standard DCC means I think Lankhmar is going to be great for the DCC line, if for no other reason just to show how you can dial stuff down a notch or 4, because it's not the case that DCC is by default dialed to 11, it's that 1-10 doesn't even exist on the dial.

So I'm not looking for the best system for Lankhmar, yeah that would probably be RQ6, I'm looking for a polished version of DCC I can actually play without hanging Disco Balls from the ceiling and snorting cocaine.

I don't know; if you look at DCC ONLY through the main rulebook, its rules seem full of potential for gonzo but the implied setting doesn't have as much gonzo as the rules should suggest.

That's part of what inspired me to make my "Last Sun" setting: it is DCC maximized to its Gonzo-potential.

Quote from: RPGPundit;825024That's part of what inspired me to make my "Last Sun" setting: it is DCC maximized to its Gonzo-potential.

The setting I cobbled up for DCC is looking more and more like Arduin crossed with Planescape... not that that was what I was aiming for but it's where the current took us.

Quote from: Simlasa;825030The setting I cobbled up for DCC is looking more and more like Arduin crossed with Planescape... not that that was what I was aiming for but it's where the current took us.

That doesn't sound too bad.

Does anyone know how there came to be two licenses for the same setting?

I'd like to know too.  Goodman specifically says "Licensed from the Estate of Fritz Leiber" which could be telling.  Shane wrote some of the old TSR stuff, it's possible he retained some rights to some of his writings?  Mongoose published Lankhmar under MRQI, was that OGL? I don't remember.  It could simply be Pinnacle didn't get an exclusive license, they license a lot of settings that are available in other systems.

Quote from: CRKrueger;826916It could simply be Pinnacle didn't get an exclusive license, they license a lot of settings that are available in other systems.

Shane said on the Pinnacle forums that this was the case and their license wasn't exclusive. I believe they got the license first but I'm not 100% certain on that.

It's really nice to have two versions, and I'd be torn.
I can see that DCC calls out to Lhankmar, but I also find SW such a cracking games engine that I'd be very drawn there as well.
So, it'd be down to my players. Round here I don't know how they'd vote but I suspect SW.. or FATE..