TheRPGSite

OK, so I've messed around with BRP, read the Renaissance SRD, played with OpenQuest 1e, and downloaded Age of Shadow.

With all of these RuneQuest/BRP-derived systems (including the originals themselves), if I wanted to run a game that encompassed the following?:

-On the lighter side of rules-medium

-Restricted magic to only certain characters (such as practicing mages or alchemists)

-Will work for a traditional fantasy campaign (elves, dwarves, halflings, humans, etc.)

-Doesn't break combat into 27 different possible actions/reactions (more simplified; crits, wound tables, a few basic moves are ok, etc)

-Allows for some character customization

I've talked this over with plenty of folks, and the following suggestions have all been given:


-Wait for OpenQuest 2 (coming out soon)
-BRP with Classic Fantasy
-Mongoose Legend
-Basic Roleplaying With Classic Fantasy
-RuneQuest 6
-Age of Shadow
-Use the Renaissance SRD, strip out the black powder stuff.

Price is a bit of a concern, as I'd like my group to be able to get at least a somewhat cheap copy of the core rules. BRP has a Quick-Start, the Renaissance/Black Powder SRD is cheap/free, Legend costs $1, and Age of Shadow is free, but if something will work better, I think we'd consider a bit more cost.

Bear in mind unlike many of my UK pals, I didn't grow up on RQ, so type slowly and simply for me when discussing. :)

The first thing that comes to mind is OpenQuest - or Age of Shadow, which is derived from OpenQuest. From what I recall, Age of Shadow attempts to emulate Lord of the Rings, so perhaps that would be closest to traditional fantasy?

You'd be dialing up the complexity of combat if you went with MRQ2, Legend, or RQ6. There is quite a bit of detail, and plenty of "actions/reactions", as you describe them.

Quote from: K Peterson;663835The first thing that comes to mind is OpenQuest - or Age of Shadow, which is derived from OpenQuest. From what I recall, Age of Shadow attempts to emulate Lord of the Rings, so perhaps that would be closest to traditional fantasy?

You'd be dialing up the complexity of combat if you went with MRQ2, Legend, or RQ6. There is quite a bit of detail, and plenty of "actions/reactions", as you describe them.

Yeah, that's what I've heard. Nothing against those games, but I'm not sure they'd be a match for the "sweet spot" for our group. These guys have handled Savage Worlds to StarCluster 3 in the last year, but I think they're after something more rules-medium, erring on the side of lite.

What form of character customization are you looking for? Strong fantasy archetypes (similar to classes, with class-like abilities), or just general variation between characters?

Any d100 system will produce varied characters, due to spending pools of free skill points, or points provided from templates, or professions. Do you need more customization?

Quote from: Zachary The First;663830-On the lighter side of rules-medium

-Restricted magic to only certain characters (such as practicing mages or alchemists)

-Will work for a traditional fantasy campaign (elves, dwarves, halflings, humans, etc.)

-Doesn't break combat into 27 different possible actions/reactions (more simplified; crits, wound tables, a few basic moves are ok, etc)

-Allows for some character customization

Well, I know it is unhelpful but that is pretty much all of the BRP/RuneQuest family! I don't really see that much difference between OpenQuest (which is meant to be lighter) against RuneQuest 6. RuneQuest 6 is pretty medium-light anyway, especially if you are restricting magic.

Magic is up to you, as magic is governed by the skill if you say "unless you are a mage, [or rather from X culture/career] you can't have it" then that is that. You might say all Elves start with Common (Folk) Magic at 20%, you might say all Humans from the Witch-Isle of Dread start off with Sorcery at 20%.

Character customization is equal with any version of BRP/RuneQuest. Roll Stats, often choose Race, Career and Culture, assign skills.

The beauty of RuneQuest is that in theory you can play any race, so Demi-humans are fully stated out and unlike D&D and such like there isn't much thought to balance. Balance is role-played, some races may well be better at certain things Or indeed everything! Although, demi-humans aren't actually that much different, Elves tend to have more POW (Magical energy and force of will)  for example, higher DEX as you would expect.
 
Personally, I find the Legend (MRQII) and therefore RuneQuest 6 simpler in combat as I dislike tables with numbers on them (BRP), and I also really like the combat maneuvers!

If you don't wish to spend too much cash I would by the RuneQuest 6 book and then tell the group to buy the Legend PDF. They are similar (although RQ6 is by far better) and you can just let the players know about the minor changes.

Quote from: K Peterson;663845What form of character customization are you looking for? Strong fantasy archetypes (similar to classes, with class-like abilities), or just general variation between characters?

Any d100 system will produce varied characters, due to spending pools of free skill points, or points provided from templates, or professions. Do you need more customization?

No, I think that would be sufficient. General variation is fine.

Quote from: elfandghost;663848If you don't wish to spend too much cash I would by the RuneQuest 6 book...

. Sentence does not compute. The retail price of RQ6 is $62. It's a good book, but it is not cheap.

Quote from: K Peterson;663853. Sentence does not compute. The retail price of RQ6 is $62. It's a good book, but it is not cheap.

Yes! :) But I meant you could just by the one..and share?

Quote from: elfandghost;663848Well, I know it is unhelpful but that is pretty much all of the BRP/RuneQuest family! I don't really see that much difference between OpenQuest (which is meant to be lighter) against RuneQuest 6. RuneQuest 6 is pretty medium-light anyway, especially if you are restricting magic.

Magic is up to you, as magic is governed by the skill if you say "unless you are a mage, [or rather from X culture/career] you can't have it" then that is that. You might say all Elves start with Common (Folk) Magic at 20%, you might say all Humans from the Witch-Isle of Dread start off with Sorcery at 20%.

Character customization is equal with any version of BRP/RuneQuest. Roll Stats, often choose Race, Career and Culture, assign skills.

The beauty of RuneQuest is that in theory you can play any race, so Demi-humans are fully stated out and unlike D&D and such like there isn't much thought to balance. Balance is role-played, some races may well be better at certain things Or indeed everything! Although, demi-humans aren't actually that much different, Elves tend to have more POW (Magical energy and force of will)  for example, higher DEX as you would expect.
 
Personally, I find the Legend (MRQII) and therefore RuneQuest 6 simpler in combat as I dislike tables with numbers on them (BRP), and I also really like the combat maneuvers!

If you don't wish to spend too much cash I would by the RuneQuest 6 book and then tell the group to buy the Legend PDF. They are similar (although RQ6 is by far better) and you can just let the players know about the minor changes.

No, that's the sort of opinion I'm looking for. I appreciate the feedback.

It's just it seemed as if Battle or Common Magic was a standard part of characters in most of what I read. No issues in cutting that out for a campaign?

Quote from: Zachary The First;663855It's just it seemed as if Battle or Common Magic was a standard part of characters in most of what I read. No issues in cutting that out for a campaign?

Nope, very easy to cut out. RQ6 specifically makes provisions for "low-magic" and "high-magic" campaigns, as does Legend.

At a first glance, though, I'd say OpenQuest 2 is the closest to what you're describing.

But BRP (the Big Gold Book, a.k.a. BGB) is also a good choice. It allows you to dial complexity up and down, and in any case the "breaking down of combat into 27 possible actions" is a Legend/RQ6 thing (and doesn't really work that way but that's beside the point). I've never read Classic Fantasy but I did read Magic World and I think it's a pretty cool; it's got elves and dwarves and orcs and the kickass demon summoning rules from Stormbringer/Elric. Worth a look.

I love RQ6 (and Legend) to bits, but it's one of these games that can be overwhelming at first contact. You can certainly dial complexity up and down, but if you're not intent on hit locations, combat maneuvers and special effects (which I feel work more like crits actually), elaborate rules for factions and cults, etc. I feel OQ or BRP will serve you better.

Remember that, whichever you choose, BRP is very cross-compatible and for the most part it's OK to plug in stuff from one line into another.

Cheers and good gaming :)

Quote from: Zachary The First;663855It's just it seemed as if Battle or Common Magic was a standard part of characters in most of what I read. No issues in cutting that out for a campaign?

It is in Glorantha where characters all have 30% Common Magic. In RuneQuest 6 it is assumed that you don't and magic is only given to certain careers (i.e. Witch) and certain creatures (i.e. Fairies). Ask if you need specifics.

Really good stuff, guys. Thank you all for your input and clarifications.

I missed the OpenQuest 2 Kickstarter, so if we did want to go in that direction, I'd need to wait until it's released, and I'm not sure when that would be. Soon, I believe.

OK, here's another question—in the RQ/BRP family, any big pitfalls a potential GM should look out for, system-wise? Any sneaky player min/max tricks to look out for? :)

My main gripe with BRP's Golden Book is that the weapons tables are kind of odd and seem to have some internal logic problems. I much prefer RQ6 Weapon Tables.

Restricting magic is entirely possible - you just can say who can and who can't learn it, or who starts with it and who doesn't. I assume you will not have cultures who use magic on common basis.

And if you want the magic users to be powerful on the levels of Black Company/Malazan/EarthSea Wizards, might want to check a writeup I did once:

http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=21604&highlight=powerful+magic&page=2

It's pretty chaotic, but it may be useful. Works with all BRP/RQ games, as far as mechanics go at least.

Quote from: Rincewind1;663873My main gripe with BRP's Golden Book is that the weapons tables are kind of odd and seem to have some internal logic problems. I much prefer RQ6 Weapon Tables.

My biggest gripe is that it tries to do everything, and instead does nothing. Flavorless. BRP is a great system, but I definitely prefer when it's implemented into a genre vs. used as a universal toolkit. Magic World, for instance, is pretty great. RQ6 is good, too.

Quote from: Brad;663874My biggest gripe is that it tries to do everything, and instead does nothing. Flavorless. BRP is a great system, but I definitely prefer when it's implemented into a genre vs. used as a universal toolkit. Magic World, for instance, is pretty great. RQ6 is good, too.

Well, I'm biased because the whole mechanics of RQ/BRP, after years of vain pursuit, became my "go to" mechanic, all their imperfection (and my various houserules) included. But I can see what you mean - I have no experience with GURPS, but it's supplement to add to the generic base certainly comes to mind when talking about BRP.

Quote from: Rincewind1;663879Well, I'm biased because the whole mechanics of RQ/BRP, after years of vain pursuit, became my "go to" mechanic, all their imperfection (and my various houserules) included. But I can see what you mean - I have no experience with GURPS, but it's supplement to add to the generic base certainly comes to mind when talking about BRP.

I was talking specifically about the Basic Roleplaying bigass gold book you referenced, not the mechanics themselves. Magic World, Runequest, Superworld, Stormbringer, Call of Cthulhu...I play or have played all of these. BRP is great, that gold book...ehhh.

Quote from: Brad;663884I was talking specifically about the Basic Roleplaying bigass gold book you referenced, not the mechanics themselves. Magic World, Runequest, Superworld, Stormbringer, Call of Cthulhu...I play or have played all of these. BRP is great, that gold book...ehhh.

Ah. Well I can understand the gripe - it is indeed a bit flavourless. But then again, aren't most universal systems, when presented with "core ruleset", at least?

Quote from: Zachary The First;663830OK, so I've messed around with BRP, read the Renaissance SRD, played with OpenQuest 1e, and downloaded Age of Shadow.

With all of these RuneQuest/BRP-derived systems (including the originals themselves), if I wanted to run a game that encompassed the following?:

-On the lighter side of rules-medium

-Restricted magic to only certain characters (such as practicing mages or alchemists)

-Will work for a traditional fantasy campaign (elves, dwarves, halflings, humans, etc.)

-Doesn't break combat into 27 different possible actions/reactions (more simplified; crits, wound tables, a few basic moves are ok, etc)

-Allows for some character customization

Given those requirements, I think your best bet is Magic World. It meets all of those requirements. I own the BRP Gold book, MRQ2, Legend, Runequest 6, OpenQuest 1, and Magic World and I think straight out of the box Magic World is the most like what you describe.

Should you decide to go the OPenQuest route, the OpenQuest Developers Kit for OpenQuest 1 is still freely and legally downloadable from D101 Games:

http://d101games.com/books/openquest/openquest-developers-kit/

Quote from: Rincewind1;663893Ah. Well I can understand the gripe - it is indeed a bit flavourless. But then again, aren't most universal systems, when presented with "core ruleset", at least?

Yep.

I advocate a very high setting/system/gamestyle match, and so generics need a lot of tweaking in my book, because few generics are any good at supporting what makes a campaign different.

Quote from: LordVreeg;663927Yep.

I advocate a very high setting/system/gamestyle match, and so generics need a lot of tweaking in my book, because few generics are any good at supporting what makes a campaign different.

Agreed - a generic system is just a set of pieces you need to put into order.

Just wanted to thank everyone again for the opinions offered thus far. Very much appreciated.

Quote from: Zachary The First;663830-Wait for OpenQuest 2 (coming out soon)
-BRP with Classic Fantasy
-Mongoose Legend
-Basic Roleplaying With Classic Fantasy
-RuneQuest 6
-Age of Shadow
-Use the Renaissance SRD, strip out the black powder stuff.

Going back to basics here: Legend and RQ6 is basically the same thing however RQ6 does a massive amount of refining, tweaking, clarifying and providing customisation options while Legend doesn't. To be harsh, Legend is a classic Mongoose product where quality control is sacrificed for the sake of having something on the shelf.

Classic Fantasy is being revised. The new version appears to being rebuilt using the Legend OGC.

Magic World is BRP optimised for generic fantasy.

Open Quest I was built on built on the (incredibly botched) Mongoose RQ I SRD. Newt managed to take the workable bits of RQI and turn it into a light, highly playable game engine. I missed the OQ2 kickstarter but I believe it is essentially an evolution of OQ1 with stretch goal-based extra content.  Renaissance and Age of Shadow were both built on the OQ1 SRD

Essentially you have 3 things to choose from.
RQ6/Legend (will call it RQ6 from now on)
Magic World
OQX

All of these will do vanilla fantasy with magic only for specialists perfectly well. None of them require grids or a whole range of tactical combat support. In my experience, however, there are two big mechanical differences between RQ6 and Magic world/OQX which have a real Marmite love/loathe impact.

1) RQ6 has hit locations but no general HPs, MW/OQX has general HPs but no hit locations.
This means that in MW/OQ6 death occurs through HP loss as usual. In RQ6, death only occurs when a critical location (head, chest or abdomen) receives twice its HPs in damage. In RQ6 you could get an arrow in each arm and in the leg and still be no closer to dying with maybe a total of 15 HPs worth of damage and be no closer to dying. On the other hand, a single 10 point axe blow to the head could kill you instantly. In MW/OQ6, 15 HPs of damage is probably enough for death.

This makes RQ6 a lot more unpredictable because you don't have the comfort blanket of HPs attrition to judge how long you can keep going for.

2) RQ6 has folded all manner of special attacks (knockback attacks, tripping, disarming etc) and special results (what happens when you roll a critical) into a single mechanic that only comes into play if you do better than the opponent. MW/OQX use the traditional BRP approach of having a bunch of different modifiers and procedures for special attacks and parries and then having a matrix of effects depending on the interaction of attack and parry.

The way it works is this.
MW/OQ6. To make a knockback attack, look up the rules for knockback attacks, apply modifiers and follow the procedure. Opponent maybe able to resist in some way.
RQ6. To make a knockback attack, just attack normally. If you get a special effect you can knock the opponent backwards as a special effect.

This means that RQ6 has a very simple decision making process before you roll the dice. Basically if it's your turn to attack in melee then you can either (this is a slight simplification) attack, try to run away, or delay so you can save your attack for a parry.

In theory this makes combat simpler and faster because you don't have to make many decisions until you get a special effect. Some people though just don't grok it or get paralysed by decisions.
E.g. OK, I want to knock the orc backwards. Hey, I got a special effect, brilliant, orc croquet here I come. Hang on. Maybe I should hit it in the head instead. Or what if I don't knock it back far enough, maybe I should try and trip it except my roll isn't brilliant. Let's have a look at the special effects options to see if there's something better I can choose.

Five minutes later and the rest of the table (orc included) has lost the will to live.

If the group groks special effects they suddenly become the best thing since sliced bread because they effortlessly produce all manner of things you want to do because things like disarming, tripping and so on become as central to combat as simply degrading HPs.

3) A bonus. RQ6/OQX both resolve everything through skill rolls. MW has retained the resistance table and characteristic rolls as well as skill rolls. RQ6/OQX have also stripped back the number of skills. This tends to make the GM's job easier in that you're not always trying to figure out which is the best mechanic for a particular issue. On the other hand, like every simplification, it occasionally feels awkward.

In summary: if you imagine Call of Cthulhu tweaked for Vanilla fantasy you have Magic World.

OQX looks like a radically stripped down CoC with new stuff added on top.

RQ6 is a radical rebuild which on the surface looks similar to CoC but gets there by a different method.

That said, they all feature rolling your skill or less on d100 and stat blocks for all of them are about as interchangeable as pre D&D 3 stat blocks.

My preference is RQ6, especially if GMing, but I would happily play any. RQ6 gives you the greatest number of tools and advice to manage a wide range of settings. It does though take a lot longer to "get" RQ6 than OQX/MW if you are already familiar with BRP games.

Ok, that was longer than I intended.

Surprised no-one has mentioned Chaosium's Magic World.

It's a complete, in-print BRP fantasy game in one volume, smaller and less expensive than RQ6 or the Big Gold Book.

I much prefer it to OpenQuest, better production values for one thing.

Quote from: deleriad;664179

No, seriously, that's an awesome overview.

So, I guess my next question is: How complicated is RQ6 to run and play? I really like what you're saying about the special combat effects (which seemingly negates my concern over 27 combat options, but I've also heard folks say it's a pretty massive tome that can be daunting. But here, it sounds as if it's pretty common-sense overall.

Would not having a lot of BRP experience actually be a perk, as you seem to suggest in your last part there?

Oh, and anyone feel free to answer; that's not just directed at deleriad. :)

Quote from: LordVreeg;663927Yep.

I advocate a very high setting/system/gamestyle match, and so generics need a lot of tweaking in my book, because few generics are any good at supporting what makes a campaign different.

I consider following to be the big five generics that have the scope to implement a specific campaign.

GURPS
Basic Roleplaying/D100
Hero System
Savage Worlds
Fate/Fudge

The first three focus more on traditional RPG genres while the later two have focus more on off the wall setting support. Although at this point in all of these game you can do pretty any setting you want.

Note that none of the above games are ready "out of the box" for an arbitary setting. However they are more ready than having to come up with House Rules for a game to fit the setting you want.

They also have a cost disadvantage coming up with house rules for D&D campaign may be a little more work but cost nothing. With GURPS, and the other system above you get ready made subsystems that you can cobble together to get the exact game you want but you have to own the books in the product line that cover those areas.

The exact approach that works for an individual is, as always, dependent on their circumstances.

In Zach's case I recommend going with Legends at first then switching over to OpenQuest2 at a later point if that is a better fit. Get one copy of Runequest 6 and crib any rules he likes. Use Legends (and later Openquest 2) as a base document modified with the rules he wants. Print it out.

Then add anything else he wants from the entire range of BRP/Legend/MongRQ/Rune6/OpenQuest line of products.

The current situation with D100 RPGs is like classic D&D. There is a family of highly related products stemming back to the late 70s which material easily taken from one to use in another. Like classic D&D and the OSR the best approach is not to overthink just pick one that "feels" right, jump in with both feet, and build from there.

Within a year of regular play you will know what you like and have the d100 tweaked the way you liked it.

Quote from: Zachary The First;664199So, I guess my next question is: How complicated is RQ6 to run and play? I really like what you're saying about the special combat effects (which seemingly negates my concern over 27 combat options)

It is very straightforward to run... up until the point that combat starts. Then you have a lot of factors to consider: weapon size (which affects parrying), weapon reach, the action point economy, special effects, situational modifiers, and tracking damage sustained to hit locations - for characters and NPCs. If you enjoy detailed tactical combat, it won't phase you. If you prefer abstraction, it may be a lot to juggle.

Quotebut I've also heard folks say it's a pretty massive tome that can be daunting.

It's a tome, but the layout adds page-count for the benefit of readability. There are also 5 fleshed-out magic systems that pad the contents. You may not have need of all of them.

If we were to go with RQ6, are there any good resources/handouts out there to help manage combat flow and modifiers? I heard there is a phone app for like 99 cents--is that worth it?

Quote from: Zachary The First;664206If we were to go with RQ6, are there any good resources/handouts out there to help manage combat flow and modifiers? I heard there is a phone app for like 99 cents--is that worth it?

You should just play Age of Heroes (d100 with strike/parry/damage system), shatter all your dreams of coping with game systems, burn out and find a new hobby. You'll be happier in the long run :)

Quote from: Zachary The First;664206If we were to go with RQ6, are there any good resources/handouts out there to help manage combat flow and modifiers? I heard there is a phone app for like 99 cents--is that worth it?

There are some GM Reference sheets on the Design Mechanism's downloads page (http://www.thedesignmechanism.com/downloads.php). The phone app is mentioned here (http://www.thedesignmechanism.com/products.php), but it's Android only. (As far as I'm aware).

Quote from: Zachary The First;664199So, I guess my next question is: How complicated is RQ6 to run and play? I really like what you're saying about the special combat effects (which seemingly negates my concern over 27 combat options, but I've also heard folks say it's a pretty massive tome that can be daunting. But here, it sounds as if it's pretty common-sense overall.

It's a big book but that's because it's a very complete book - you get a lot of magic, you get a lot of monsters, you get a lot of toolkit stuff.

There are some very nice official combat cheat sheets there which really go the extra mile in making the combat options easy to handle. With those to hand I think it'd be a breeze to run and play.

The only advantage I'd say RQ6 has over Legend is price. You can get the core Legend book very, very cheaply. On the other hand, you get what you pay for (Mongoose Matt rewriting RQ2 in order to get a BRP-based fantasy RPG onto the market after losing the RQ2 licence.) It's not flat-out bad, but it was designed by the same guys as RQ6 and RQ6 is most definitely a refinement of it, and much more complete-in-one-book at that.

Quote from: Killfuck Soulshitter;664189Surprised no-one has mentioned Chaosium's Magic World.

It's a complete, in-print BRP fantasy game in one volume, smaller and less expensive than RQ6 or the Big Gold Book.

On reading the OP, this immediately came to mind as well for me.  

Quote from: K Peterson;664217The phone app is mentioned here (http://www.thedesignmechanism.com/products.php), but it's Android only. (As far as I'm aware).

Darn it!  I just got an iPhone and would to have this app.

Quote from: gleichman;664213You should just play Age of Heroes (d100 with strike/parry/damage system), shatter all your dreams of coping with game systems, burn out and find a new hobby. You'll be happier in the long run :)

How does your Rpg compare with some of these other d100 systems/variants? In terms of the qualifiers that Zachary gave: rules complexity, limited magic, streamlined combat, character customization, and application for traditional fantasy.

As a side-note: I could swear that you've posted things like, "Don't buy my game", "It's only intended for my play-group", and "it's not well-written", in the past. :)

Quote from: K Peterson;664226How does your Rpg compare with some of these other d100 systems/variants? In terms of the qualifiers that Zachary gave: rules complexity, limited magic, streamlined combat, character customization, and application for traditional fantasy.

Compared to BRP (I can only really speak to early versions btw), there is no doubt it's more complex. In fact it contains many of the bugbears people mentioned in the thread about the most complex games a person has played. Had more people read it, I'm sure it would have appeared in that thread.

Combat:
The core combat process is similar to BRP (strike, parry, damage with location) but there are more modifiers as the attacker directly affects the ability of the defender (i.e. it scales). This will result in more addition and subtraction than BRP. Think HERO OCV and DCV but applied to more values and in double digits. (Reason 1 why I say no one but my groups would be willing to play by these rules).

There's division as well, but that existed to the same extent in BRP.

While there are combat maneuvers they are situational in utility (i.e. are sub-optimal unless the tactical conditions are favorable) and thus not part of every attack and defense, so on this point it may be less complex than newer versions of BRP.

Magic
Magic is in general more constrained than say D&D and the game system isn't built on its presence. It can be ignored or used in whole or part. It also runs across a range of power levels and flavors.


character customization
Characters can be extensively customized. There's a 'class' framework (more like profession actually) that defines those areas where the character excels, but the option is present to do nearly anything one would wish *short of doing*everything*.

Thus a 'Wizard' could use a sword if he wishes to invest in it. He just won't do so as well as an otherwise identical 'Warrior' does for free.

Managing this and maintaining its balance for a multiple generation campaign and for the entire lifespan (including immortal ones) of the characters results in a complex character generation roughly on par with say a HERO System skill purchase subsystem.

I consider this section to be the most complex in the rules, and very few people rule the type of campaign that would need the produced results. (Reason 2 why I say no one but my groups would be willing to play by these rules).


application for traditional fantasy
It was designed to recreate traditional high fantasy- Middle Earth (all the ages, not just the end of the Third), Prydain, Jason and the Argonauts, etc.

A goal I take seriously, see my thread on Genre Simulation.

As a side note, I consider the core rulebooks to be usual in how complete it is. One would have to dive rather deeply into very specific areas (like say land and keep management, naval warfare, or mass combat) to need an expansion. That it manages this with 262 pages highlights that it's a pure rulebook without setting or fluff.

Quote from: K Peterson;664226As a side-note: I could swear that you've posted things like, "Don't buy my game", "It's only intended for my play-group", and "it's not well-written", in the past. :)

Indeed, that's why I put a :) at the end of my post and suggested that using the rules would result in burn out and a change of hobbies.

A couple of people here (John Morrow, Bloody Stupid Johnson) have actually read the rules, and I'm sure they'd agree with me on this point. They may have recovered from the insanity inducing effort by now...

Quote from: gleichman;664235

Quote from: K Peterson;664226How does your Rpg compare with some of these other d100 systems/variants? In terms of the qualifiers that Zachary gave: rules complexity, limited magic, streamlined combat, character customization, and application for traditional fantasy.

Quote from: K Peterson;664226Compared to BRP (I can only really speak to early versions btw), there is no doubt it's more complex. In fact it contains many of the bugbears people mentioned in the thread about the most complex games a person has played. Had more people read it, I'm sure it would have appeared in that thread.

Combat:
The core combat process is similar to BRP (strike, parry, damage with location) but there are more modifiers as the attacker directly affects the ability of the defender (i.e. it scales). This will result in more addition and subtraction than BRP. Think HERO OCV and DCV but applied to more values and in double digits. (Reason 1 why I say no one but my groups would be willing to play by these rules).

There's division as well, but that existed to the same extent in BRP.

While there are combat maneuvers they are situational in utility (i.e. are sub-optimal unless the tactical conditions are favorable) and thus not part of every attack and defense, so on this point it may be less complex than newer versions of BRP.

Magic
Magic is in general more constrained than say D&D and the game system isn't built on its presence. It can be ignored or used in whole or part. It also runs across a range of power levels and flavors.


character customization
Characters can be extensively customized. There's a 'class' framework (more like profession actually) that defines those areas where the character excels, but the option is present to do nearly anything one would wish *short of doing*everything*.

Thus a 'Wizard' could use a sword if he wishes to invest in it. He just won't do so as well as an otherwise identical 'Warrior' does for free.

Managing this and maintaining its balance for a multiple generation campaign and for the entire lifespan (including immortal ones) of the characters results in a complex character generation roughly on par with say a HERO System skill purchase subsystem.

I consider this section to be the most complex in the rules, and very few people rule the type of campaign that would need the produced results. (Reason 2 why I say no one but my groups would be willing to play by these rules).


application for traditional fantasy
It was designed to recreate traditional high fantasy- Middle Earth (all the ages, not just the end of the Third), Prydain, Jason and the Argonauts, etc.

A goal I take seriously, see my thread on Genre Simulation.

As a side note, I consider the core rulebooks to be usual in how complete it is. One would have to dive rather deeply into very specific areas (like say land and keep management, naval warfare, or mass combat) to need an expansion. That it manages this with 262 pages highlights that it's a pure rulebook without setting or fluff.




Indeed, that's why I put a :) at the end of my post and suggested that using the rules would result in burn out and a change of hobbies.

A couple of people here (John Morrow, Bloody Stupid Johnson) have actually read the rules, and I'm sure they'd agree with me on this point. They may have recovered from the insanity inducing effort by now...

this may be one of my favorite posts from you.  I understand much more.  I will buy and read them, since they are more similar to my own design and goals.

Quote from: LordVreeg;664243this may be one of my favorite posts from you.  I understand much more.  I will buy and read them, since they are more similar to my own design and goals.

Don't say I didn't try and a warn you :)

Drop me a line and let me know what you think, what parts were unclear and if the magic lists were interesting or boring. Was the dog training rules worth having? That sort of thing. No need to burn a lot of time on it, but I would love a few tidbits.

Quote from: Killfuck Soulshitter;664189Surprised no-one has mentioned Chaosium's Magic World.

It's a complete, in-print BRP fantasy game in one volume, smaller and less expensive than RQ6 or the Big Gold Book.

I much prefer it to OpenQuest, better production values for one thing.

There were passing references to it in several posts, including one of mine. That said, yes, Magic World is a nice, concise fantasy game based on BRP. I bought the PDF and a print copy; well worth the money.

Quote from: Zachary The First;664199No, seriously, that's an awesome overview.

So, I guess my next question is: How complicated is RQ6 to run and play? I really like what you're saying about the special combat effects (which seemingly negates my concern over 27 combat options, but I've also heard folks say it's a pretty massive tome that can be daunting. But here, it sounds as if it's pretty common-sense overall.

Would not having a lot of BRP experience actually be a perk, as you seem to suggest in your last part there?

I reckon that it has enough of a learning curve and combat can have enough moving parts that you would want to start small. As you get more experienced, there are plenty of ways to simplify running the system. Despite what people might think, you don't have to track every single action point for every single character.

For example, just because you can build every NPC exactly the same as you do a PC, doesn't mean you should. There's a section for rabble and underlings which shows how to minimise the record keeping which, name notwithstanding can pretty be used for any combatant unless it's someone pretty major.

If you want a feel for how the system might look in action, the first scenario in the Book of Quests is available on the website as a free download.

As to previous experience, the people who struggle most with RQ6 tend to be those who have played a lot in systems where balance is a central design goal, where it is easy to compare relative threats and where game mastery is an element. RQ6 is most definitely not a 'fair' game.

OQ2 and if there is no magic; double the hitpoints. Simply state as s Fiat that only some very few people have magic.  Or. Age of Shadows if you want overtly Tolkien like.
These are the low-medium options.
RQ6 and BRP or LEGEND are medium-high. Legend is very cheap.

I have converted some srd monsters to OQ on my BBS. if you feel the need it's quite fun.

Here are 2: http://www.gamingtavern.eu/MonsterWorlde/RustMonster.pdf
http://www.gamingtavern.eu/MonsterWorlde/Owlbear.pdf

Then I got too busy and didn't do anymore, ;-(

Man, you guys are being extremely helpful, thank you. Right now, I'm waffling simply because so many of these games sound like they have good features. :) Normally, I'd just mash it all up, but I don't really have the funds for that.

OK, a couple of other questions:

--Is there any decent support material for RQ 6? Honestly, it doesn't sound as if it needs much. Any plans for future "core" stuff? I didn't see any at Design Mechanism.

--RQ 6 has Passions, right? Is it close to Pendragon, and can anyone give me an example of how they'd come up in play?

--If I went the BRP route, would it be worth waiting for the new Classic Fantasy? Opinion seems divided on that book.

--Has anyone actually done a review/content review for Magic World? Info appears skimpy.

Quote from: Warthur;664219There are some very nice official combat cheat sheets there which really go the extra mile in making the combat options easy to handle. With those to hand I think it'd be a breeze to run and play.

Are these sheets in that GM Pack, or elsewhere? Mind a link if elsewhere?

Loz and Pete will support RQ6, and I think that will mean back to Glorantha, although there will be another fantasy setting along soonish.
There is the Book of Quests now, and frankly that and the main book will keep you busy for a year. Then they'll have Monster Island out.
Remember also that effectively all these games are interlinked so a Legend scenario  will work with RQ6, or vice versa.

OpenQuest has Savage North which is fun (if a little lethal when I ran it), and Here Be Dragons along soon which will be a blast (friends wrote it).

Legend has Age of Treason, and many of the older MRQII Glorantha books are still on DriveThru (sold by Design Mechanism) now. The revised Spider God's Bride is *meant* to be fixed now and offers up Howard/Ashton-Smith style gaming for d100 (e.g. Conan..)

Magic World is good, and there are a lot of BRP scenarios and settings you can buy and download from Chaosium.

Frankly, Classic Fantasy did nowt for me, it's rekitting BRP to be D&D and why? I also suspect it'll return as a OpenQuest book.

Renaissance is just lovely and loads of stuff is being published, including the new Pirates and Dragons, which might scratch your itch.

However, it's time to choose. None will hurt you, all are close so you can switch away with the same characters later, and most have stuff to play, even if published for one of the others.

But like you I waver.. I said OQ last time for ease and cost, now I would say for utter cheapness go AoS or Renaissance, and yet I kinda know Magic World will best meet your sensibilities..

However.

Rule 1 in BRP. Combat is lethal. Go easy on PCs. Let opponents be weak or run away, or even kind and capture and ransom losers.

Quote from: Zachary The First;664461OK, a couple of other questions:

--Is there any decent support material for RQ 6? Honestly, it doesn't sound as if it needs much. Any plans for future "core" stuff? I didn't see any at Design Mechanism.

No core, but setting books are planned. I guess they'll introduce some tweaks in these(chargen, magic etc), but you're right. You really don't need more rules than what's already there. The free Firearms-PDF is worth grabbing.

Quote from: Zachary The First;664461--RQ 6 has Passions, right? Is it close to Pendragon, and can anyone give me an example of how they'd come up in play?

Passions can be a lot; a chararcter's drive, morals(or lack thereof), fears or ingrained cultural values. They can be used as straight-forward skill(test(and fail) your "Family honor" to avoid braining your brother's murderer") or used to boost your skill(add a percentage of "Family honor" to all skills when duelling the murderer)

Quote from: Zachary The First;664461--If I went the BRP route, would it be worth waiting for the new Classic Fantasy? Opinion seems divided on that book.

Maybe. The first edition is half a book, essentially the BRP-version of the Player's Handbook. As far as I can tell, Rodney is mothballing BRP and converting both released and unreleased material to Legend.

Quote from: Zachary The First;664461--Has anyone actually done a review/content review for Magic World? Info appears skimpy.

BRP Central (http://basicroleplaying.com/content.php) is your friend.

Quote from: Zachary The First;664461Are these sheets in that GM Pack, or elsewhere? Mind a link if elsewhere?

They're in the back of the book, and in the GM-pack(free)

Excellent, thanks again!

Quote from: Zachary The First;664461--Is there any decent support material for RQ 6? Honestly, it doesn't sound as if it needs much. Any plans for future "core" stuff? I didn't see any at Design Mechanism.

There isn't any additional "core" support material, because the core book stands as very complete on it's own. It covers a lot of ground - frex: multiple spell systems, and an extensive monster 'manual'. There's not much necessary to add to it - from my perspective. (Unless you want something like a mass combat system or domain management. And you might be able to get that by plugging in the MRQ2 release, Empires (http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/82514/Empires)).

The most recent/only supplement, Book of Quests (http://www.thedesignmechanism.com/news/book-of-quests) is a "loose campaign" of sword & sorcery adventures. I would call it quite "decent" - but I'm biased since I wrote one of the adventures for it. (And, I think that Deleriad also contributed to it). I think there's a lot of value in it, and some quality adventures - whether you want to use the setting as-is, or strip out adventures to insert into your own campaign.

Monster Island (http://www.thedesignmechanism.com/news/monster-island-discovered-) is yet to be released. It's a "setting, sourcebook, and bestiary".

Quote from: ptingler;663896Given those requirements, I think your best bet is Magic World. It meets all of those requirements. I own the BRP Gold book, MRQ2, Legend, Runequest 6, OpenQuest 1, and Magic World and I think straight out of the box Magic World is the most like what you describe.

Agreed. Magic World fits all your requirements perfectly.

Quote from: tzunder;664468Legend has Age of Treason, and many of the older MRQII Glorantha books are still on DriveThru (sold by Design Mechanism) now. The revised Spider God's Bride is *meant* to be fixed now and offers up Howard/Ashton-Smith style gaming for d100 (e.g. Conan..)

Legend does not have Age of Treason any more as the deal with Mongoose has expired. The next book for the setting (Shores of Korantia) is coming out for RQ6 and slated for end of this year.

QuoteIs there any decent support material for RQ 6? Honestly, it doesn't sound as if it needs much. Any plans for future "core" stuff? I didn't see any at Design Mechanism.

Depends what you mean by 'core stuff'. I'm not sure I understand, but if you mean splat books and rules expansions, well, no. We're trying to resist doing that kind of thing - although where there's clearly room for something that will add value, such as firearms, we'll do a little treatment of it. But you're not going to see 'RQ Magic' or 'RQ Monsters' or 'RQ Weapons'. We'll leave that for others.

In terms of imminent releases...

'Monster Island' in about 6 weeks. This is a brilliant book. Chock-full of scenario seeds, weird cultures, strange settings, bizarre practices and rites, and monsters. Loads of monsters.

'Shores of Korantia'. Towards the end of the year. This is a setting/world book that's in the same world as 'Age of Treason'. And it, too, is superb.

Also towards the end of the year, 'Mythic Briton', my treatment of Dark Ages Britain with fair old nod to Cornwell.

Early next year, 'Luther Arkwright' which takes RQ into contemporary, plane-hopping, multi-dimensional, fin-de-siecle, psychopop adventure.

And also Glorantha. There'll be two books: 'RQ: Adventures in Glorantha', which Pete is working on now, plus a campaign book which, if you were at Eternalcon in Germany last month, you'll already have a very good idea of which region and who's writing it.

There'll also be 'Fall of Byzantium' by Michael O'Brien, which is a campaign set in a mythic Constantinople and focuses on the last days of the city, and the Middle Ages, in 1415.

In between all of this, there are scenarios being produced that we'll release as one-offs.

Oh, and you'll be seeing support for RQ from third party publishers, too. I'm hoping to make an announcement about two RQ Gateway partners in the next couple of weeks. And there'll be foreign language translations of the core rules (Spanish, German and French, for certain).

So, there's plenty of support on its way. None of Design Mechanism's material is a conversion of something produced for another system; all of it is is diverse, and all of it is being written by great industry talent.

Quote from: Iron Simulacrum;664562Legend does not have Age of Treason any more as the deal with Mongoose has expired. The next book for the setting (Shores of Korantia) is coming out for RQ6 and slated for end of this year.

I That's good news for RQ6.  I hope you are pleased. IMHO the proofing and layout wi be better.

Quote from: tzunder;664649I That's good news for RQ6.  I hope you are pleased. IMHO the proofing and layout wi be better.

Will definitely be better produced than if it was from Mongoose. I'm looking forward to this; time for some more info on the Iron Simulacrum blog, Jonathan?

I've been very frustrated by the lack of availability of the Iron Companion. I thought I'd found a copy at a German online store, but that's now gone. If anyone here has a copy (and is in Europe) and wants to sell it, please PM me. I know I can get it as a pdf, but for this particular book I'd prefer a physical copy.

I think Magic World fits pretty much everything you want, needing only very minor, but very easily dealt with, houserules.

Quote from: Zachary The First;663830
-On the lighter side of rules-medium

The BRP ruleset used in Magic World is definitely on the light side of rules medium.

Quote-Restricted magic to only certain characters (such as practicing mages or alchemists)

This can be a GM/party decision. You could set limits such as POW >= 16 , or INT + POW >= 32, to limit what characters can use magic without breaking any rules.

Quote-Will work for a traditional fantasy campaign (elves, dwarves, halflings, humans, etc.)

No problem.

Quote-Doesn't break combat into 27 different possible actions/reactions (more simplified; crits, wound tables, a few basic moves are ok, etc)

Basic combat is just straight up swing/parry/damage/armor. General HP are used (though Hit Locations can be an option), critical hits double damage, and single blows exceeding 1/2 the opponents HP generate a Major Wound which is determined by a chart. There are a few "moves" that can be used if desired.

Quote-Allows for some character customization

Characters are completely customizable.

Cost is $35 MSRP. You could get the free BRP Quickstart for your players, at the core it is the same.

Ian

Based on the OP, Magic World does seem like the right choice.

Personally, I somewhat prefer RuneQuest 6, but I would be delighted to run or play MW as well.

This plan of mine sort of took an unsuspected turn. I showed some of my players some of the descriptions and arguments in this thread, and even though we've been trending rules-medium, I think we're going to give RQ6 a shot, possibly grabbing in items from other compatible items that seem like a good idea. I was really surprised, since I really thought it would be too complex for them, but they like what they've read. So now we're saving up pennies, and will give the game a go, I think.

Thanks to everyone for their recommendations. Really helpful, and really gave me a lot to think about. I have Magic World on my list to check out as well at some point.

Quote from: Loz;664604Depends what you mean by 'core stuff'. I'm not sure I understand, but if you mean splat books and rules expansions, well, no. We're trying to resist doing that kind of thing - although where there's clearly room for something that will add value, such as firearms, we'll do a little treatment of it. But you're not going to see 'RQ Magic' or 'RQ Monsters' or 'RQ Weapons'. We'll leave that for others.

I also wanted to thank you for your input--it's always cool to hear from a game's designer or author. That's something that guys like Brett, clash, Graham, and others here do very well, and I'm pleased to see this, too.

I appreciate the input. From what I've seen, RQ6 looks very comprehensive. It was more curiosity on my part than anything. I appreciate there not being 12 "core" books or anything to buy.

If you're going to do RQ6, here's a fillable PDF character sheet that does all the math for you.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1384882/RPG/RQ6/Character_Sheet_RQ6_7_5_Chris-Harvey.pdf

When I ran Mongoose RQII with a bunch of players who were new to the system, I found the biggest hurdle was that you call your cool move after you already confirmed your hit. How successful your hit was could play a role in determining which cool move you want to do. There can be a fair bit of swing-and-block so a few of the guys felt frustrated when they would narrate their swashbucklage, roll and hit and shout with joy, only to have their hit parried. It's important to wait on the dramatic description: save it until you know you've already successfully hit, and then watch the opponent squirm.

Sounds like good advice. Thanks!

Glad your group have hit on a system they like, Zach. There's an embarrassment of riches when it comes to BRP-based fantasy at the moment so at least you have the knowledge that if RQ6 doesn't pan out in the long run you could fairly painlessly shift to one of the lighter BRP fantasy systems but still use most of the supporting material from the RQ6 book.

Quote from: Warthur;665171Glad your group have hit on a system they like, Zach. There's an embarrassment of riches when it comes to BRP-based fantasy at the moment so at least you have the knowledge that if RQ6 doesn't pan out in the long run you could fairly painlessly shift to one of the lighter BRP fantasy systems but still use most of the supporting material from the RQ6 book.

Definitely. It's nice as well that most of the advice I've received has been free of any sort of edition warring. I'm sure it's out there, but there seems to be a lot of friendly overlap between the BRP/RQ6/MW/OQ folks.

We'll see how everyone takes to it. Combat will be a departure for us, but outside of combat, it actually seems pretty straightforward.

Quote from: Zachary The First;665177Definitely. It's nice as well that most of the advice I've received has been free of any sort of edition warring. I'm sure it's out there, but there seems to be a lot of friendly overlap between the BRP/RQ6/MW/OQ folks.

If there are any edition wars in BRP, I have yet to see them. We may have our favorite versions, but we like all of them.

I think the lack of edition wars in BRP circles is a factor of the way people have generally been good about maintaining cross-compatibility. To use D&D as an example, you can't really use much 4E rules-based stuff in 3E unless you are willing to do a lot of conversion work, whereas if you're running BRP you can use most other BRP-based material with minimal rules massaging (if any). Where hardcore fans of one D&D edition or another see other editions as undesirable aliens leeching player attention away from their One True Way without giving anything back, BRP fans tend to see other editions of BRP stuff as handy-dandy toolkits to swipe ideas from.

Well, it's hard to have a proper edition war when it's the same bloody book all the time.

Well, that's not true. But the mechanical engine remained the same.

Quote from: Rincewind1;665228Well, it's hard to have a proper edition war when it's the same bloody book all the time.

I could go on about the many differences between versions, but there isn't much point.

Quote from: Rincewind1;665228Well, that's not true. But the mechanical engine remained the same.

Whether you prefer hit locations to major wounds, random armour to fixed armour, divine magic to runemagic or whatever, most parts of most systems map fairly well to other systems.

It looks like the closest BRP gets to edition wars is Call of Cthulhu 7th ed.....there, I said it!

The first Mongoose RuneQuest did cause some unrest as well.

But unless you're actively looking to pick a fight, the BRP-crowd is quite mellow.

QuoteI also wanted to thank you for your input--it's always cool to hear from a game's designer or author. That's something that guys like Brett, clash, Graham, and others here do very well, and I'm pleased to see this, too.

I appreciate the input. From what I've seen, RQ6 looks very comprehensive.

I'm obviously thrilled that you've chosen RQ6, but I will say this.

BRP, Magic World, OpenQuest, Cthulhu... every single one of these games has a common heritage, a common language and a common feel. Each is a brilliant game, and I've played all of them. Funnily enough, I know, and am friends with, all the guys behind each of these systems - even Cthulhu 7. We are one, big, community. I am sure that you will, in time, develop your d100 which takes elements from all over the places and meshes them seamlessly together.

There's a staggering amount of compatible material out there for you to choose from, which will convert, on the fly, as easily as drawing breath. Have fun with RQ, and have fun with d100. It will serve you very well, for a very long time.

Quote from: Loz;665326I'm obviously thrilled that you've chosen RQ6, but I will say this.

BRP, Magic World, OpenQuest, Cthulhu... every single one of these games has a common heritage, a common language and a common feel. Each is a brilliant game, and I've played all of them. Funnily enough, I know, and am friends with, all the guys behind each of these systems - even Cthulhu 7. We are one, big, community. I am sure that you will, in time, develop your d100 which takes elements from all over the places and meshes them seamlessly together.

There's a staggering amount of compatible material out there for you to choose from, which will convert, on the fly, as easily as drawing breath. Have fun with RQ, and have fun with d100. It will serve you very well, for a very long time.

And it helps, of course, to have an excellent GM! :D

Quote from: baragei;665314The first Mongoose RuneQuest did cause some unrest as well.

I remember that. I think that was a factor of some perceived D20isms (stuff which looked a lot like feats, in particular) on the one hand and people being kind of unhappy about a new RQ game coming out without Chaosium's involvement. (I believe there was also some unpleasantness when Steve Perrin popped up to point out some text in the MRQ book which he said was based on his own RQ work and which he hadn't been given any credit for.)

The first factor I think people have settled down about now - especially with the tweaks in MRQ2 to that idea - and the second factor I think people are more accepting of now that Design Mechanism seem to have won people over with RQ6, which respects the game's history so much the cover art is basically a remix of the RQ1/2 cover.

I ran RQ6 briefly, and so far it has been a lot of fun. I used Glorantha as my setting. One of my players kind of complained about how heavy armor plus shields was mechanically superior to dodging, but he plays ninjas, and he conceded that it was a design choice that the game was being honest about. This is opposed to 3.5, which he feels (and I agree) is a trap laden mess.

Quote from: Loz;665326I'm obviously thrilled that you've chosen RQ6, but I will say this.

BRP, Magic World, OpenQuest, Cthulhu... every single one of these games has a common heritage, a common language and a common feel. Each is a brilliant game, and I've played all of them. Funnily enough, I know, and am friends with, all the guys behind each of these systems - even Cthulhu 7. We are one, big, community. I am sure that you will, in time, develop your d100 which takes elements from all over the places and meshes them seamlessly together.

There's a staggering amount of compatible material out there for you to choose from, which will convert, on the fly, as easily as drawing breath. Have fun with RQ, and have fun with d100. It will serve you very well, for a very long time.

awesome answer, BTW.

I built my D100 back in the early 80s, though constantly tweaking and creating advanced vs normal rules.  Could not agree more.

So I have the pdf (and the combat app), but not the print version yet (saving up my pennies for that!), and right now I’m going through the rules, emailing back and forth with some of my players. Combat is still intimidating a bit, especially with weapon length, etc., but I’m pleasantly surprised as to how common sense a lot of the moving pieces are. One of the guys is talking about playing an escaped slave-turned-mercenary, which seems absurdly simple per chargen.

I’m trying to decide what magic systems to use—I know magic needs to be limited (no folk magic for all, just for adepts ), but the gods are active, so I think Theism would definitely be in there. I just don't want to go crazy with magic that doesn't fit or is needlessly complex, given the confines of our setting. I have a lot more reading to do. Thankfully, I have some more sessions of our other game left before we start on this one.

I'm going to urinate in the pool now and ruin the vibe by saying I don't much care for Magic World at all.  I say this not to be a dick but more to provide an opposing POV you can do with as you will.

I bought the PDF of Magic World, but I assume nothing much was changed for the physical printing.

A minor quibble: I find the layout amateurish.  I'm not sure if the physical book is a digest or what, but the main body font is very large, the font size and kerning is wildly inconsistent in the section headings and by all the unholy gods of typography, celtic uncial is not a headline font.  The text flow seems to jump all over the place.  I found it surprisingly difficult just to read the book because the layout kept distracting me.

More generally: Magic World is just a collation of the old Elric!/Stormbringer 5th ed rules.  Now, most of the setting-specific mechanics from E!/S5 have already been folded in the BGB as Optional Rules.  I already have the BGB, and as a general rule competing with yourself isn't a good idea in a niche market.  So I don't understand why Magic World chose to include the E!/S5 specific mechanics that are mostly duplicated in the BGB already (Allegiance, basic magic types, total hit points, skills over 100%, etc.) but left out the things that made E!/S5 unique as a dark fantasy RPG (the demon summoning/binding/creation rules, Bronze Grimoire/Unknown East stuff, etc).  I can't help but think that given a choice between including the sailing material from Sailor on the Seas of Fate or the demon binding and advanced magic rules from the Bronze Grimoire, they really should have chosen the latter option.  BRP has too much of a problem already with reprinting the same magic systems over and over again.

I was unimpressed with the rationale for including the Allegiance system unmodified from E!/S5, as it's been lampshaded to Light vs. Dark instead of Law vs. Chaos.  The argument is that a lot of fantasy does draw clear distinctions between the Good Guys and the Bad Guys and so this is entirely appropriate, but that's really only true of the innumerable Tolkien-knockoff  Bloody Fantasy Trilogies (https://www.google.com/search?q=%22bloody+fantasy+trilogy%22).  Elric is explicitly Not That, so it seems odd to see that rationale applied to a setting-specific mechanic from a dark and morally ambiguous universe.  Mythic Iceland handled Allegiance to gods much, much better, and either following that lead or generalizing it would have been better, IMHO.

TL;DR: given the respective costs, I wish I'd ponied up for a used copy of S5 from Amazon instead of buying Magic World.

Quote from: Loz;665326BRP, Magic World, OpenQuest, Cthulhu... every single one of these games has a common heritage, a common language and a common feel. Each is a brilliant game, and I've played all of them.

Something that has frustrated me mightily as I delve into the d100 product space for the first time since college is that nowhere can I find a simple breakdown of the different available iterations of D100 and what the major gameplay-affecting differences are.

Quote from: daniel_ream;665843Something that has frustrated me mightily as I delve into the d100 product space for the first time since college is that nowhere can I find a simple breakdown of the different available iterations of D100 and what the major gameplay-affecting differences are.

That would have been pretty neat to have when I was doing my research. Sort of like the OSR Handbook (http://www.rpgnow.com/product/109631/Old-School-Renaissance-Handbook), I suppose.

Quote from: daniel_ream;665843Something that has frustrated me mightily as I delve into the d100 product space for the first time since college is that nowhere can I find a simple breakdown of the different available iterations of D100 and what the major gameplay-affecting differences are.

As I see it, there are two d100-camps. The simple and the detailed. The differences between Chaosium's BRP (Stormbringer, Magic World, CoC, Goldbook), OpenQuest, Renaissance, GORE and what have you, are marginal at worst. Small differences in chargen, skill-lists, combat, magic etc. They all still play the same.
The detailed ones - MRQ, Legend and RQ6 play much the same, but are significantly crunchier.

Doing what Zachary did here - asking - is perhaps the best way of getting answers, as the d100-inflation is significant (not really a bad thing).

I'd split it differently:

More complex d100: RQ3-6, full BRP
Less complex: Stormbringer (Chaosium), CoC, OQ, GORE, Renaissance, Age of Shadows

The core resolution system being the same is kinda the good thing.

Magic and religions and creatures and passions and allegiances and demons, they vary between games.

Quote from: daniel_ream;665840...the main body font is very large, the font size and kerning is wildly inconsistent in the section headings and by all the unholy gods of typography, celtic uncial is not a headline font.  The text flow seems to jump all over the place.  I found it surprisingly difficult just to read the book because the layout kept distracting me.

Yeah, MW could have had half the page count with a proper font and better layout.

Quote from: daniel_ream;665840...So I don't understand why Magic World chose to include the E!/S5 specific mechanics that are mostly duplicated in the BGB already (Allegiance, basic magic types, total hit points, skills over 100%, etc.) but left out the things that made E!/S5 unique as a dark fantasy RPG (the demon summoning/binding/creation rules, Bronze Grimoire/Unknown East stuff, etc)...

I believe that Chaosium is planning to publish a separate book with all the cool additional magic stuff from E!/S5 (demon summoning, Bronze Grimoire, Unknown East, etc.), compatible with BRPGB.

What's with BGB/BRPGB? Big Something Book? BRP Something Book? I can't figure out what the "G" is.

B for big. G for gold. B for book or brick.

Quote from: Stainless;666033B for big. G for gold. B for book or brick.

Oh, Gold. It always looked more like plain old yellow than gold to me, hence the confusion.

Personally, I prefer to call it the BYJ, for "Big Yellow Joint" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hoCcArfJE0).

It's first nickname "the Yellow Brick" was semi-officially denounced over at BRP Central. It wasn't dignified enough:D

Now it's BGB - Big Gold Book.

Quote from: daniel_ream;665840A minor quibble: I find the layout amateurish.  I'm not sure if the physical book is a digest or what, but the main body font is very large, the font size and kerning is wildly inconsistent in the section headings and by all the unholy gods of typography, celtic uncial is not a headline font.  The text flow seems to jump all over the place.  I found it surprisingly difficult just to read the book because the layout kept distracting me.

This. I was extremely interested in MW but I opened up a copy of the physical book (it's regular 8.5" x 11", FWIW) at my FLGS and realized that I'd never be able to actually read it for any sustained period of time, owing to the layout. The body font is an incredibly poor choice for both readability and economy of space. Why not just use Minion (as in CoC6e), or Goudy (as in the BGB), or Garamond? You know, I actually have to read the book before I can use it...

My BRP variant of choice for fantasy is a houseruled OpenQuest with a few bits stolen from Legend, and I'm working on a steampunk-flavoured post-apoc implementation in my spare time.

KoOS

Well Ben Monroe wrote MW for free and as a homage to Lynn Willis, so I assumed the style was retro on purpose. Personally I have no issues with it.

Quote from: Stainless;666105so I assumed the style was retro on purpose.

The layout and typography is clearly trying to ape the layout and typography of Elric!, at least, but it's just violating a lot of rules of basic design.  As I said, I consider it a minor quibble because I understand the limits most RPG writers are working under.

I've doinked around with InDesign a bit, and it strikes me that some of the people in the storygame movement (say what you like, they know how to lay out books in an attractive and usable way) ought to write up some simple docs on how to lay out a basic RPG, maybe produce a CC-licensed template or two.  RPGs are somewhere between books and magazines, so grabbing an existing Adobe template often isn't effective.

Quote from: AkrasiaYeah, MW could have had half the page count with a proper font and better layout. [...] I believe that Chaosium is planning to publish a separate book with all the cool additional magic stuff from E!/S5 (demon summoning, Bronze Grimoire, Unknown East, etc.), compatible with BRPGB.

This is the meat of my problems with MW: I would rather have seen a book that incorporates all the stuff from E!/S5 that didn't make it into the BGB and is also out of the ordinary for fantasy gaming.

Anyone know why Magicworld hasn't been offered for sale on DTRPG? I really hate ordering pdfs from seperate sites.

Quote from: daniel_ream;666142This is the meat of my problems with MW: I would rather have seen a book that incorporates all the stuff from E!/S5 that didn't make it into the BGB and is also out of the ordinary for fantasy gaming.

MW was meant to be a stand alone book specifically for fantasy roleplaying, not requiring the BGB. And while the additional sorcery/magic would have been nice to include, it would have made the page count tremendously higher. My playtest/proofreader copy of Advanced Sorcery is 114 pp without any illustrations or other layout/font stuff - just simple text and headers, and minimal charts.

Ian

Quote from: Vagabond;666221My playtest/proofreader copy of Advanced Sorcery is 114 pp without any illustrations or other layout/font stuff - just simple text and headers, and minimal charts.

Ian

Would you say it's on its way to a GenCon release time frame?

Quote from: Stainless;666243Would you say it's on its way to a GenCon release time frame?

From Ben back in April:

QuoteWell, it's completely written and edited. I believe there are two books ahead of it in queue for layout/art. I also gather that one of those books is nearly done, and that some art has been chosen for AS.

My -hope- is that we'll see AS this summer. As a bonus, I beleive (since they're easy to put together), they'll be fast-tracking the GM Screen pack to come out shortly before or after. So, with luck, by GenCon, Chaosium should have two supplements out for it.

And Kaiu, they are working on getting it to DTRPG as of about a week ago.

Ian

Quote from: Vagabond;666251From Ben back in April:



And Kaiu, they are working on getting it to DTRPG as of about a week ago.

Ian

much thanks, looking forward to it.

Quote from: K Peterson;664483Monster Island (http://www.thedesignmechanism.com/news/monster-island-discovered-) is yet to be released. It's a "setting, sourcebook, and bestiary".

For those who are interested, Monster Island (//www.thedesignmechanism.com/products) for RQ6 is now available for pre-order from the Design Mechanism store. It will ship at the end of July/beginning of August, but you'll also receive the PDF version, free of charge, to download immediately.

Its a pure Sword & Sorcery sandbox setting with enough material to last years of play. Our homage to Griffin Mountain, inspired by Burroughs, REH and CAS amongst others. :cool:

Quote from: Pete Nash;667197...
Its a pure Sword & Sorcery sandbox setting with enough material to last years of play. Our homage to Griffin Mountain, inspired by Burroughs, REH and CAS amongst others. :cool:

Sounds brilliant! I'm looking forward to getting a copy.

As an update to this thread, my players plan on picking up RQ6 at Gen Con Indy this year (several of them prefer it to purchasing online, and I admit, there is something special about convention purchases).  I've been working through the combat aids and handouts, and I'm really excited to see how the system plays. Given the preliminary brainstorming of types of characters my players want to play, I think character creation is really nicely set up for the sort of early Iron Age/mythic/Greek/Viking mashup we're going for.

I also have Monster Island on my to-buy list, once I have a bit of extra funding, and I'm waiting to hear something on the RQ6 hardcover kickstarter that sounds imminent.

Quote from: daniel_ream;666142The layout and typography is clearly trying to ape the layout and typography of Elric!, at least, but it's just violating a lot of rules of basic design.  As I said, I consider it a minor quibble because I understand the limits most RPG writers are working under.

Yeah, the font choices and layout of Magic World are poor. As a plus, though, the pdf reads well on a tablet due to the large font.

Magic World still hits the spot for me, though. Great though RQ6 is, it has a large page count and requires some GM work to select magic systems, create cults etc. It feels like a Serious Game while MW feels like something to whip up some sword and sorcery fun.

Quote from: Killfuck Soulshitter;668253Yeah, the font choices and layout of Magic World are poor. As a plus, though, the pdf reads well on a tablet due to the large font.

The next frontier in publishing is going to be variable layouts for screens with wildly divergent sizes and aspect ratios.

Really, any game that's going to have a PDF edition either needs to be laid out as a digest or have different formats for different devices.

QuoteMagic World still hits the spot for me, though. Great though RQ6 is, it has a large page count and requires some GM work to select magic systems, create cults etc. It feels like a Serious Game while MW feels like something to whip up some sword and sorcery fun.

If there's one thing that I could criticize RQ6 for, it's the lack of examples.

I like a lot fo what RQ6 brings to the table, but as mentioned before:
1) it leaves an AWFUL lot of work to the DM: the magic systems are essentially 'sketched' in, with no effort at balancing.  
2) the Action-point thing, with the break-point of 2 AP vs 3 AP just a *hair* over average stats, is terrible.  Having 1 extra AP means essentially a free, undefended action, every round, it's a huge advantage.

There are other gripes, but essentially it boils down to this: this was a system built out of love, and playtested out of love, and everyone involved *really* wants RQ to become again a living, breathing system with regular supplements and a community that's not 50-year-olds navel-contemplating on the Glorantha Mailing list.  But there's the problem: a rules system needs to be tested by people that *want* to find its weak points.  Who WANT to break it.  That doesn't appear to have been done.  The combat maneuvers - while a basically good system - is badly broken, making it far, far too easy for a single defender to be 'locked down' and have no AP to function at all.  Goodbye boss fights.

Latest news is that what was going to be a campaign supplement (Adventures in Glorantha) has been co-opted.  With Stafford and crew once again at the helm of Chaosium, they bought Moon Design (who owned the license).  This means Chaosium once again holds the license AND is eager to grow RQ.  So they made a deal with TDM that before next Gen Con, RQ will come out in a NEW edition (effectively, yes, RQ7) called only "RQ" and it will be fully integrated as a Glorantha game, with all the setting stuff inherent in the game.  That SHOULD resolve a lot of the workload on new DMs, and (hopefully) reinvigorate Glorantha as a game world.
Still doesn't fix my issues with the combat, but I'm looking forward to it and will CERTAINLY buy it.

Quote from: styopa;8488612) the Action-point thing, with the break-point of 2 AP vs 3 AP just a *hair* over average stats, is terrible.  Having 1 extra AP means essentially a free, undefended action, every round, it's a huge advantage.

The way I read it you normally only get 1 proactive action (attack, draw weapon, regain footing, etc.) per cycle of Strike Ranks. The extra AP are primarily useful for defense, more parries, countering spells, evading, etc...

Your average combat cycle will have those involved expend 2 action points - one to defend and one to attack. There are exceptions - if you're being ganged up on, forced to evade hellfire or a giant's club, or trying to be clever with delaying actions or manuevring etc.
But basicly, if your opponent has two action points while you have three; at the end of the first cycle he's probably done and you're free to put one right in his undefended smacker.
Having more action points than your opponent is nothing but a huge advantage.

In theory. And ..not uncommon in play. But not always - the RAW works pretty well provided you approach every encounter as a boss fight.

A proposed fix to the action point-conundrum is to lock everyone to to 2 AP, leaving 3+ to the übercombatants. Another fix is to raise the AP-threshold, but you'd have to look at how strike ranks and initiative play into the equation. It has been proposed to make AP's rely on skill level instead of attributes, which would unbalance things.

The action points was a thing I worried about, but found it to be pretty much a non-issue as we got to play it.

Quote from: baragei;848904But basicly, if your opponent has two action points while you have three; at the end of the first cycle he's probably done and you're free to put one right in his undefended smacker.

Doh! I can see where I misread that now. I joined a RQ6 game on D20 to help learn me the rules but so far we've only had 1 combat.

Still, doesn't seem like a problem to me. Fast guy throws more punches, smart guy sees more openings.

Quote from: baragei;848904The action points was a thing I worried about, but found it to be pretty much a non-issue as we got to play it.

That has been my experience as well. It is a minor advantage but doesn't really unbalance the game.

QuoteThe combat maneuvers - while a basically good system - is badly broken, making it far, far too easy for a single defender to be 'locked down' and have no AP to function at all.

Styopa, I'm looking forward to your detailed, play-based examples of precisely which Special Effects are badly broken, how broken they are, where they broke, and what you would personally do to fix the issues. I'm also looking forward to your evidence to support the below conclusion:

QuoteBut there's the problem: a rules system needs to be tested by people that *want* to find its weak points. Who WANT to break it. That doesn't appear to have been done.

Because you've obviously talked in great detail to the six play test groups used for RQ6 who candidly admitted that they failed to playtest RQ6 properly or had their playtest feedback crushed. Failing that, perhaps you could publish the exchange of playtest notes between Design Mechanism and the playtesters which will clearly support the above statement.

I've no doubt you can back up your various conclusions - even though they seem to be at odds with the vast amount of other experiences and feedback out there.

Quote from: Zachary The First;663830-Wait for OpenQuest 2 (coming out soon)
-BRP with Classic Fantasy
-Mongoose Legend
-Basic Roleplaying With Classic Fantasy
-RuneQuest 6
-Age of Shadow
-Use the Renaissance SRD, strip out the black powder stuff.

Meh. They're D100 mechanic. So it doesn't matter which one you pick. Just like with D20 mechanic.

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;849033Meh. They're D100 mechanic. So it doesn't matter which one you pick. Just like with D20 mechanic.

There is a lot of truth to that. ;)

Oh dear, for a sock-puppet post this is pretty weak and pretty sad considering what TDM has achieved over a short period of time.

Quote from: styopa;8488611) it leaves an AWFUL lot of work to the DM: the magic systems are essentially 'sketched' in, with no effort at balancing.

The magic systems in RQ6 are the best they've ever been and full of examples. This is your weakest complaint and has no basis - not only does the rule book fully flesh out all the systems, Monster Island, for one, puts the sorcery system and spells into a specific setting and shows what you can do with it. Ironically the only complaints I've seen about magic are from RQ2 grogs (that's the 50 year old navel-gazers to you) who don't like the loss of power in battle magic (now folk magic) which doesn't match up to RQ2 levels of power. I'm not sure what you mean by 'balancing', but strangely, one of the reasons for reducing Folk Magic was to ensure it's not as powerful as Divine Magic, hence, 'balancing' it.

Quote2) the Action-point thing, with the break-point of 2 AP vs 3 AP just a *hair* over average stats, is terrible.  Having 1 extra AP means essentially a free, undefended action, every round, it's a huge advantage.

The AP system is one of those things which sounds much trickier than it is. It's also pretty easy to adjust if you don't like it - ie. just shift the point where you get 3 APs lower down. Do I have 3AP or only 2? Do you feel lucky?

QuoteThe combat maneuvers - while a basically good system - is badly broken, making it far, far too easy for a single defender to be 'locked down' and have no AP to function at all.  Goodbye boss fights.

They're called special effects now...have you played RQ6? CMs, as they were in MRQ2, are one of the stand-out additions to the RQ rules, I remember laughing when I read that section of the rules - the laugh of recognition when I realised someone had created something so innovative that immediately made the game better, and that sense was only re-inforced when I played it.

QuoteLatest news is that what was going to be a campaign supplement (Adventures in Glorantha) has been co-opted.  With Stafford and crew once again at the helm of Chaosium, they bought Moon Design (who owned the license).  This means Chaosium once again holds the license AND is eager to grow RQ.  So they made a deal with TDM that before next Gen Con, RQ will come out in a NEW edition (effectively, yes, RQ7) called only "RQ" and it will be fully integrated as a Glorantha game, with all the setting stuff inherent in the game.  That SHOULD resolve a lot of the workload on new DMs, and (hopefully) reinvigorate Glorantha as a game world.
Still doesn't fix my issues with the combat, but I'm looking forward to it and will CERTAINLY buy it.

So after slagging RQ6 this is really a moan about the move towards Glorantha? I don't think you have the details quite right but the rules will still be RQ6. Everyone is disappointed this is going to cause a delay (it seems) in releasing the AiG material but the upside is for the most part a lot of the production work is shifted over to Chaosium now and TDM can concentrate on writing, which ultimately should mean more RuneQuest, more often, and more lavish production. Hurrah. Now stop moaning and go fight a hydra in Monster Island, come back and tell us how that went.

(http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h15/Bilharzia/hydra.gif)