Do you really like MRQ?

Discover the Legend RPG, Mongoose's fantasy game.
weasel_fierce
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1260
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 6:35 am
Location: The borderlands

Postby weasel_fierce » Tue Nov 24, 2009 9:20 pm

TrippyHippy wrote:Actually, I'd have to say I really like the Mongoose Chargen too. It's much more focused than the standard BRP method, and allows a nice balance between packaged archetypes (the cultures and careers) and the usual flexibility of BRP. I also like the way that they've resolved the interaction of Characteristics with Skills, using them as bases. It's quite elegant, in all.

I do know a lot of gamers compare MRQ unfavourably with BRP, but there are certain areas I actually prefer. Character generation is one of them. What I don't really like in MRQ is the table-referencing, convoluted combat system.
Char-gen is one of the parts where I universally prefer MRQ.

The combat system.. the opposed roll system from the update and GM's guide is pretty quick but it skims over some other things. No need to refer to tables though, unless you roll exactly the same (which is a 1% chance so eh)

I think RQ3 still did hit points and injuries the best. Give 1 more HP per location to make people a bit more durable and it'd be fine in my book.
looking for a free set of gritty, realistic'ish scifi wargame rules ?
http://www.freewebs.com/weaselfierce
Christopher Graves
Weasel
Posts: 39
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 2:56 am

Saving Throws

Postby Christopher Graves » Tue Nov 24, 2009 11:02 pm

Everyone wants to be a hero!
TrippyHippy wrote:What I don't really like in MRQ is the table-referencing, convoluted combat system.
I think this view of these skills doesn't take into account the way PCs are supposed to be developed in RQ. There is a whole lot of players out their who wont play a character that doesn't have characteristics far above the average. There is some logic to this, after all those who do, do because they can. Nevertheless, the problems brought up here and elsewhere regarding Persistence and Resilience when used as saving throws is only and issue for characters with extremely high skills and corresponding characteristics. Characters with a sufficiently high governing characteristic for these skills can be formidable when GMs allow the rules to get in their way as opposed to using them as a tool.

I like the chosen terms Persistence and Resilience. I think the terms "toughness" and "willpower" from the recent post imply more than these skills are supposed to represent. For instance it is toughness that allows a person to travel long distances and carry heavier loads but resilience is not used for this at all in MRQ. Instead, Athletics governs these abilities. Willpower implies so much more than being able to focus and concentrate and stick to something forgoing minor discomforts. Anyone who thinks willpower is limited to these skills is deluded. But persistence does imply this quite nicely. Willpower implies among other things a sense of purpose and this must be roleplayed out.

Because persistence and resilience can not rise higher than their governing characteristic they provide real limits. Certain magical efforts or similar actions that require something other than physical endurance, or when determining the character's ability to heal or withstand harsh elements. I rarely use these skills as saving throws. For instance I never roll against resilience to see if a wound instantly kills a character. For this kind of saving throw I allow players to use hero points. I personally require more than just 1 or 2 heropoints to save a character from some certain death or devastating injury.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests