Quote from: buzzI was part of the original playtest group, and I can tell you that it was neither. I doubt we went much longer than a month before Sprange shut down the Yahoo! group. A month may sound like a lot to some, but it isn't, especially since we started from zip, e.g., "What kind of die mechanics should the game use?"

Woah! Are you saying that Mongoose seriously considered dropping BRP altogether?

QuoteThe funny thing is that the group was laying dormant for a while, all of us waiting forever for the next playtest doc, when we saw that the Mongoose site was advertising MRQ as "the most extensively playtested game we've ever produced."

Yeah, I get the impression that they don't go for playtesting much - although wasn't the second playtesting phase significantly longer? And what was the rationale for kicking off all the original playtesters?

QuoteI think this speaks volumes about Mongoose, as does their producing the line as as series of skinny, no-frills, $25-$35 books.

That's another thing that has irked me - the Legendary Heroes book seems, to be frank, kind of useless, and the Monsters book is nothing special.

The line Mongoose keep coming out with is that they want the core rules to be cheap, clear, and accessible - certainly, the production values are much better on the Gloranthan supplement - but in that case why not print them in softcover, which might go a way to making the price less ridiculous for a 120 page book?

QuoteThe lack of involvement allowed for Steve Perrin was also very disheartening.

The Runequest curse continues on...

Can you shed any light on Perrin's lack of involvement in the game? I remember hearing that he dropped out at an early stage of playtesting, and I recall seeing him call out Matt Sprange on the RPG.net forums - he asserted that the MRQ main rulebook still uses some of his text, despite there being no "originally designed by Steve Perrin" credit anywhere in the book, and Sprange eventually sent him a paycheck at freelancer's rates.

As far as I am aware, Greg Stafford is the only one of the original RQ posse acknowledged in the Mongoose books - presumably because they don't want to lose Glorantha.

Not sure I'd dismiss the legendary book so offhand. I was reading through it last night and, once I understood what they were driving at, it seemed pretty durn good.

Legendary Heros seems to be the Runequest equivilent of Epic D&D, and unlike the Epic book it actually looks like a fun expansion, rather than the same old grind with new gilt.  I have a few problems with it... like the persistance of christian mythology in what is ostensibly a 'alternate world fantasy setting'. Seriously, the charactes can become the four horsemen of the apocalypse!  That sound a shitload more epic than using epic whirlwind feat to kill a dozen men at once or some shit.

It also seriously introduces magic items that are a fuckload cooler than 'sword, +1' or what have you.  You know, magic items that feel... magic. And those are just meant to spur you, the GM, into making a few of your own...

Quote from: WarthurWoah! Are you saying that Mongoose seriously considered dropping BRP altogether?

For at least one draft, the mechanic was the same as HARP: roll a modified d100 and try to get over 100. Granted, it was ditched pretty quickly. There was then a lot of debate over how to fix opposed rolls and skills over 100%, which seems to have been largely ignored in the final release.

Quote from: WarthurYeah, I get the impression that they don't go for playtesting much - although wasn't the second playtesting phase significantly longer? And what was the rationale for kicking off all the original playtesters?

I can't speak to any rounds of testing beyond what I was involved in. All I know is, we were all waiting for v1.5 of the playtest doc, and then suddenly saw Mongoose advertising the game, and then the Yahoo! group disappeared. I don't get the impression much testing was done after this point, as it was too close to release, but I can only speculate.

AFAIK, the original group was ditched because someone leaked the playtest doc, but I only have foggy memories of this being the official reason.

Quote from: WarthurThe line Mongoose keep coming out with is that they want the core rules to be cheap, clear, and accessible - certainly, the production values are much better on the Gloranthan supplement - but in that case why not print them in softcover, which might go a way to making the price less ridiculous for a 120 page book?

I find it weird that they initially claimed that MRQ would be a lean little game in one book for $19.95, and instead released a semi-complete game in two $25 books (more, if you want to include other supplements).

Quote from: WarthurCan you shed any light on Perrin's lack of involvement in the game? I remember hearing that he dropped out at an early stage of playtesting, and I recall seeing him call out Matt Sprange on the RPG.net forums - he asserted that the MRQ main rulebook still uses some of his text, despite there being no "originally designed by Steve Perrin" credit anywhere in the book, and Sprange eventually sent him a paycheck at freelancer's rates.

All I know is this:

1. Mongoose announces MRQ on an RPG.net forum thread.
2. Steve pops into the thread: "Really?"
3. Matt responds: "Dude, Steve! Do you want to be involved?" I was pretty stunned that this was basically an afterthought, especially since Steve has had his RQ revision, "SPQR," on the Web for years.
4. Playtesting starts, and Steve is in the group. It appears that he's being tapped to write some magic rules for the line, as far as we can tell.
5. Yahoo! group goes dormant, Steve seems as clueless as the rest of us.
6. MRQ is released, no sign of Steve being credited anywhere that I'm aware of.

Quote from: WarthurAs far as I am aware, Greg Stafford is the only one of the original RQ posse acknowledged in the Mongoose books - presumably because they don't want to lose Glorantha.

Greg is the one who owns it and licensed it to them, so I guess his name had to be in there somewhere.

I dunno. When I first heard that RQ was coming back, I thought, "Sweet!" Then, when I heard Mongoose was in charge, I thought, "Crap!" But, I decided not to pre-judge, and I signed up for the playtest. The playtest was worse than I could have imagined, and then it turned out to be for nothing.

One of my favorite RPGs of all time resurrected as Yet Another Uninspired Percentile System in typically bland, ugly Mongoose layout... and they'll probably make a decent amount of money on the whole deal.

I don't typically like to badmouth publishers; I know that Mongoose is supposedly very good in dealing with their army of freelancers. Still, they drive me nuts. I don't understand why so many people buy their products.

QuoteI don't understand why so many people buy their products.

Starship Troopers!

I wasn't too pleased with Starship Troopers, but I do enjoy "Slaine" and I have some of their Character splat books for d20.

Conan is pretty fun. There are rumours they change it to RuneQuest though... Feh.

the new Runequest can handle Conan just fine. Season him up a bit, maybe toss in some legendary abilities and Conan is capable of laying waste to small armies of lesser fighters. Not that I advocate doing so, that's all on you.


Anyway, I'm covering the Runequest books, one per day, the first two of three are up. I expect others might be out, but my LGS isn't on top of the ball on getting the rest.

Check 'em out in the reviews section for all the answers you need short of actually buying the bastards.

Quote from: Spikethe new Runequest can handle Conan just fine. Season him up a bit, maybe toss in some legendary abilities and Conan is capable of laying waste to small armies of lesser fighters. Not that I advocate doing so, that's all on you.

The old BRP could handle Elric, so of course you could run Conan with RQ. But Conan D20 is a really good product. Level and Class mechanics really mesh great with the Conan style and they did a great job adapting the combat system to something less magically infused. It would be sad to see that go to waste...

But well, it wouldn't be the first system for Conan. I don't think the coming Age of Conan MMORPG will use anything resembling current art.

Quote from: SosthenesThe old BRP could handle Elric, so of course you could run Conan with RQ. But Conan D20 is a really good product. Level and Class mechanics really mesh great with the Conan style and they did a great job adapting the combat system to something less magically infused. It would be sad to see that go to waste...

But well, it wouldn't be the first system for Conan. I don't think the coming Age of Conan MMORPG will use anything resembling current art.

See... I'd be more inclined to disagree with the levels/classes thing. I've read me a LOT of Conan. I mean the Howard stuff, the DeCamp stuff, the BW comics, seen the movie and the anti-movie, and the Red Sonja (conan lite?) movie... Hell, I saw Hans Mueller play Conan on TV once or twice. I know me some Conan.

And Y'know... I don't see a lot of 'levels' happening. If you are a mook, your a mook, if you are a threat, you are a credible threat.  No 'he's good, but his level isn't high enough' sort of shit. Same thing with classes. Conan started out a thief and a runaway slave. Yet most fanboys would never (ever) be happy if the Cimmerian had anything less than a full fighter BaB.  Classes seem to restrictive, and Conan multiclasses a lot (pirate, thief, fighter, barbarian... maybe  a bit of ranger in there....), yet he never lost that fighterness.  By my estimate, that makes classes a definite no go.

Conan as a Legendary Hero in the New Runequest, I can see that, sure. Conan as some other sort of character in some other game system? Sure, I'll buy it.  D20 style Conan?  Er... I'll have to get back to you.  

I mean, i understand the book is awesome at capturing the conan-ness and all that. I just don't see it carrying over into play.

Quote from: SpikeSee... I'd be more inclined to disagree with the levels/classes thing. I've read me a LOT of Conan. I mean the Howard stuff, the DeCamp stuff, the BW comics, seen the movie and the anti-movie, and the Red Sonja (conan lite?) movie... Hell, I saw Hans Mueller play Conan on TV once or twice. I know me some Conan.

I salute your bravery. I've never made it through a single episode of the Ralf Moeller series. I do have the Kull movie, though.

Quote from: SpikeAnd Y'know... I don't see a lot of 'levels' happening. If you are a mook, your a mook, if you are a threat, you are a credible threat.  No 'he's good, but his level isn't high enough' sort of shit. Same thing with classes. Conan started out a thief and a runaway slave. Yet most fanboys would never (ever) be happy if the Cimmerian had anything less than a full fighter BaB.  Classes seem to restrictive, and Conan multiclasses a lot (pirate, thief, fighter, barbarian... maybe  a bit of ranger in there....), yet he never lost that fighterness.  By my estimate, that makes classes a definite no go.

Well, Conan definitely had a career. You really see a difference between the Barbarian boy and the leader of men he becomes later on. Whether you do that with levels or with skill increases really doesn't matter. I see some character growth, and not just in his fighting prowess.
And if Conan is level 20 and has no attribute below 18, arguing about a point of BAB lost is a moot point. In any system, Conan should probably stay above the abilities of the characters. It would be too much testosterone flying around if six people try to be Conan at the same time. So you either play solo adventures (GURPS had some of those) or you'll have a group where none comes close to the abilities of the Cimmerian, but together you can go on similar adventures.

So a "realistic" model of the Conan character is really not neccesary for the game, having adventures in a similar vein is more important. Conan D20 does a nice job with this.

Now, what would be the better system for the Grignr RPG? RQ or D20?

Wait, so there's a variant of BRP that's OGL now?  

Is the system any good?

RuneQuest SRD (445 KB)

Quote from: droogRuneQuest SRD (445 KB)

Yeah, I'm looking at it right now.  Found the nice PDF JamesV did, makes it a bit easier to see it all in one doc.