5th preview is up

[Adept]

Dex rolls
Improvement rolls
Skill lvl
weapon that you can use
skill lvl ceilings for runepriest, socerers and shamans.
In RQ dwarfs had the same DEX as humans in D&D they don't.

So what? Dwarves are powerful, short limbed and stubby. I think reducing the dex is a good call, especially as the skills listed are very high indeed.

A dwarf is not a small agile ninja (like a classic RQ halfling). The powerful but stubby dwarf given here is quite neat. I quess the Siz 9 also needs to be taken in relation to the human average of 13 (I guess). Still seems a touch high, especially for the ducks. I'm not complaining though, those things seem like perfectly valid design choises.

A dragon that can use it's breath weapon once/hour is rather sorry though. Should just have made the breath cost it magic points, or something like that.

 

[SteveMND]

The world moves on. Do you want to move on with it?

Without getting into the issue of whether Homer has valid points or not, let me remind people that just because something is new doesn't necessarily mean it's better.

It's clear with the previews that MG had a particular vision for the game, and that's fine. Unfortunately, the nature of the world is such that whenever a decision like that is made, the product you end up with will appeal to some and not appeal to others.

The question then becomes whether or not the people you are appealing to are the ones you wanted to get as your customer base to begin with.

For me, I've gradually fallen outside that group as more and more previews were made available. But clearly, lots of other people like the changes made to the game, so best of luck to them and MGP.

 

[Lord Twig]

D12?
[sits holding head in hands, quietly weeping.]

Huh? D12 is cool and underused. It's one of the actual polyhedrons afterall.

Certainly better than what they call D10s now a days. In the old RuneQuest rules a D10 was a 20-sided die that was marked from 1 to 10 twice. That was a balanced die. I still have mine.

 

[Archer]

No Total HPs? :shock: :shock: :shock: :roll:
Hmm, that puts a nail in my plan to use my old and very easy "no-hp-per-location-but-halved-total-hp" deal to reduce the amount of record keeping needed as a GM.

If allowed, could someone please explain how you keep track of damage that is not location specific in the new rules? such as disease, poison, electrical shocks, etc.

 

[Wulf Corbett]

If allowed, could someone please explain how you keep track of damage that is not location specific in the new rules? such as disease, poison, electrical shocks, etc.

I can think of a few ways. CON damage, chest damage, damage threasholds instead of points (like True20 & Blue Rose), etc.

Wulf

 

[andakitty]

As for the hit points, if there is not a base pool it will still work just fine. A game I have run recently called Fifth Cycle has a lot in common with RQ. One of the major things are hit points to locations (without a base pool), just assigning hp to the various body locations based off a 'hit point line'(the total of key stats). Effects are all calculated based on the damage done to a specific location only. It really does work just as well as having location plus a hp pool, like RQ2. Also, the total of hit points is similar, with similar base weapon damage. The numbers are balanced and will work just fine, especially if there is some sort of critical wound result for varying damage, that is x points over a location and something bad happens. The way what we have seen so far is constructed, it is logical to conclude that there will indeed be such rules.

Most of the changes I see are minor. Some not so great maybe, but the important things are still present. Percentile roll under, skill based, reactive combat. It is close enough to a version of BRP that if I want I can use it as a resource for a BRP game. I am interested to see whether I will like it better than BRP or not, but I am no longer worried about whether or not I'll like it at all. The dwarf stats are real close to the Magic World stats for a dwarf, for instance. As follows:

Str 4d6
Con 2d6+6
Siz 2d6
Int 3d6
Pow 3d6
Dex 3d6

This makes me think they are looking at other BRP games besides RQ for inspiration, whether that idea horrifies or elates, right or wrong. My take is that a fan of any BRP game should like this. Even if it isn't exactly all that you wanted a month ago. I think I'll be happy with it, although I think the weapons are mostly nerfed, the heroic ability stuff is unnecessary, the roll for initiative every round is not a good idea, and so forth. It doesn't matter. What does matter is that we are getting a playable close cousin to BRP that is *finally* going to get the multigenre support it deserves.

 

[andakitty]

Archer, in Fifth Cycle, usually you reduce hit points evenly in all locations. Also saves are used, with a weakening spiral from failed saves with effects similar to fatigue. Or reduction of Con as mentioned already. Or a mixture of methods, such as a poison that does a set amount of damage over a set time span, with every location being effected.

 

[GbajiTheDeceiver]

I imagine that total HP is just not given cos it's a calculated value based on CON and SIZ, whereas location HP are given for demonstrative purposes. I know it's confusing, but let's put it down to an innocent slip. Or maybe it's part of the speeding up of combat???

I must say, this really really looks good and puts quite a few fears to rest. My suspicions that a lot of the "Feat" stuff was an equivalent of Cult levels for non magicians are all but confirmed with the other levels, which - let's not forget - appear to be nothing more than a grading system rather than anything related to specific game mechanics. This is also supported by the snippet of rules for generating advanced characters. We know from Preview 2 that there's going to be 6 or 7 pages of previous experience, so presumably the system is a lot more flexible than just having a block of points to allocate (which is the impression given here).

A positive thing in the creature stats is that we definitely have Ducks, and confirmation that Broo and Dragonewts will also be appearing in the basic rules.

Dice based damage modifiers rather than fixed numbers - good stuff.

Lets not worry about creature traits. They're just a convenient way of batching up special abilities, so that the same ability doesn't have to be described multiple times. That way, we get more out of those 120 pages. Nice one!

"Dwarfs" instead of "dwarves" - always nice to see a bit of distancing from Tolkien. And also very much in the RQ tradition.

Dragon stats are almost the same as RQ3:

STR 20d6
CON 10d6
SIZ 20d6
INT 10
POW 4d6 + 6
DEX 3d6

Although INT has now become free (even though RQ3 allowed for intelligent Dragons with INT 4d6).

Plus we have a statement that the creatures are all going to be Gloranthan natives, so there will be no Orcs, no Halflings, and no other generic cliches.

Plus, we can now get a good feel for the extent of the Skills list. It's going to be at least as long as this:

Athletics
Boating
Disguise
Dodge
Evaluate
First Aid
Healing
Influence
Language
Lore (Various)
Perception
Persistence
Resilience
Riding
Runecasting
Sleight
Stealth
Survival
Tracking
Weapon (Various)

All in all, a good preview that's gone a hell of a long way to dispel many of the heebeejeebees caused by parts of the others.

 

[andakitty]

Agreed!

 

[Wulf Corbett]

I imagine that total HP is just not given cos it's a calculated value based on CON and SIZ, whereas location HP are given for demonstrative purposes.

Those are pages from the bestiary section of the main rulebook. With all the stats to use, for example, Ducks (the entire stats for Ducks are given from beginning to end, with no chance of missing bits at either). No Total Hit Points.

Wulf

 

[GbajiTheDeceiver]

I imagine that total HP is just not given cos it's a calculated value based on CON and SIZ, whereas location HP are given for demonstrative purposes.

Those are pages from the bestiary section of the main rulebook. With all the stats to use, for example, Ducks (the entire stats for Ducks are given from beginning to end, with no chance of missing bits at either). No Total Hit Points.

Wulf

That's most likely correct, the more I think about it. It would seem as if total HP have been removed in order to speed up combat then (less book keeping required).

I'll hold fire on whether I think that's good or bad for a bit. On one hand, most combats usually do end up with a disabling wound before total HP come into play, so it wouldn't matter much. On the other there would be no mechanism for whittling down an opponent by means of multiple (non-disabling) wounds.

We still haven't seen the full combat rules though, so there might yet be a CON/SIZ based mechanism which doesn't require a total HP score.

 

[Adept]

Again, I dearly hope there will be some wound penalties.

 

[andakitty]

Gbaji, again referring to Fifth Cycle, you can whittle someone down by concentrating on head or torso areas, which render more than disabling results. It is dependant on rules we can't see yet, really. Rules that are implied by the direction the rules we can see are taking. Is there a major wound table to go with specified levels of damage? Or simply rules like 'limb severed if it takes x2 hit points'. Bleeding rules? Perhaps when you take a wound of specified seriousness to a limb which then bleeds out it starts reducing hit points to a location next to it, and so on until a critical location bleeds out? I'm willing to bet that such rules are there. And I know that it can work, similar damage rules work like a charm in other games. With less paper work.

 

[Cobra]

The world moves on. Do you want to move on with it?

Without getting into the issue of whether Homer has valid points or not, let me remind people that just because something is new doesn't necessarily mean it's better.

It's clear with the previews that MG had a particular vision for the game, and that's fine. Unfortunately, the nature of the world is such that whenever a decision like that is made, the product you end up with will appeal to some and not appeal to others.

The question then becomes whether or not the people you are appealing to are the ones you wanted to get as your customer base to begin with.

For me, I've gradually fallen outside that group as more and more previews were made available. But clearly, lots of other people like the changes made to the game, so best of luck to them and MGP.

I have to agree with you, Steve. I also think that it's important to voice our concerns about the product - what better way for MG to have a finger on the pulse of what old RQ fans are looking for? So I hope people will continue to voice opinions - that's what a forum is all about!

I'm also concerned by a few things, mostly in the combat. I would hate to see total hit points disappear, too. I'm concerned about strike ranks, and a number of other things that have been left unexplained. I'm not prepared to write off the new version yet, though, and would like to review the whole book before deciding if I like it or not.

It is also worth pointing out to those of you who think we should accept change for change's sake that a number of us were not looking for or expecting a re-write of runequest at all. All we wanted was for someone to put it back on the market and support the product so our new players could buy there own rulebooks and so there would be a a few new supplements available to us from time to time.

We all know that new doesn't necessarily mean better. Look at the movies, for God's sake - remakes and sequels don't necessarily mean quality. So please don't suggest that people who don't accept the new rules need to 'move on'. We all love RQ and Glorantha and are concerned that one of our favourite products might become a cheap remake designed to please the masses. Surely this is the reason this forum exists.

That said, I personally wouldn't use dwarfs/dwarves at all - they're very passe. Lets hope there are some new and interesting creatures to come down the pipe - some that my players won't already know most things about.

Cobra

 

[Gaheir]

A change that I find interesting is the seeming replacement of several skills with broad skills. Listen and spot, for instance, seem to fall into perception, as hide and move quietly seem to fall into stealth as a single skill. I am uncertain if that simplification will make the game better or not. Play will tell.
It does avoid the complications when moving/hiding, and will narrow the number of skills to advance per adventure. But, there was joy in using and raising multiple skills per adventure.
The creatures seem fine-I have no trouble accepting less agile dwarfs, that certainly fits my concept better, anyway. Squat, solid and powerful-not duelists. The dragon is generic, not Gloranthan, and certainly the range in power of dragons will be immense-as immense as the gulf between a young weaponthane and a heroquesting Stormlord.
Ducks, I agree, should be smaller. Dwarfs merit their size, not because of height, but because of mass-size reflects both.

 

[SteveMND]

I have to agree with you, Steve. I also think that it's important to voice our concerns about the product - what better way for MG to have a finger on the pulse of what old RQ fans are looking for? So I hope people will continue to voice opinions - that's what a forum is all about!

True, but at this point, it's all water under the bridge. The new version is done, and probably at the printers by now. Nothing we say at this point -- indeed, nothing we have said since they opened this forum, for that matter -- was made in any sort of time to have Mongoose react significantly to it.

There are clearly a lot of people that like what they've seen in the previews; I'm just not one of them. I, of course, was expecting a certain level of change -- predominately in streamlining a bunch of raw edges and simplifying a few things, but I personally feel, based off the previews, that they've oversimplified the game.

One of the things I liked most about the earlier BRP-based versions of the game was the complexity of the system. No, that's not the right word, because it really wasn't all that complex. The intricacy of the system.

But as I said, they appear to have simplified things greatly, and while that's fine for many people, that's just not what I was hoping for. C'est la vie.

 

[Archer]

Having played other BRP clones without Total HPs, I can say that it leaves a bitter and sour taste in my mouth.

Some examples (not specifically happened, but based on similar situations that has happened during play);
GM; "You fall down 100 ft. cliff, and take 25 points of damage."
Player; "Ah, thats ok. I took that hit in the arm, so I broke it. But I will live".

GM; "..as the spell is cast, a bolt of lighting erupts from his hand and envelops you, making you scream in pain, but leaves no visible damage, and leaves you weakened. You take 10 points of damage representing your weakened state"
Player;"In which body part? Because unless it is in the head or the torso, I will live."

GM; "The sword leaves a wound that will not stop bleeding. You loose 1 HP each round due to bleeding."
Player; "In the leg? no worries, I will not die then. The leg becomes useless at -5 X points, but I will survive."

And that is not mentioning the nightmare of dealing with combat where more than two persons are involved. I just hate keeping track of body-part HPs if it gets more complicated than that. If, as has happened when we play Stormbringer, you have 10 to 30 individuals involved in combat, it becomes a record keeping nightmare.
Keeping track of one value for each NPCs or PC is ok. Keeping track of 7 or more for each character, that just slows down the game to a crawl.

 

[andakitty]

I'm amused. Not one of those are a problem: they are actually EASIER to deal with without a hp pool.

item 1; divide the 25 by 7(no. of locations), apply to all locations evenly starting with the head. By my calculation, that's 4 points each to head, arms, and chest and 3 each to the other locations. Wow. That's hard. That's also a very lucky PC for a 100 foot fall.

item 2; depends on how you want to do it; as above or target one body location for max damage, have the bolt exit a second location for half damage. I prefer the first, my players the second. I can't imagine why. Maybe because it tends to leave a smoking corpse with no head and a gaping hole in the chest.

item 3; after hit points+ bleed out of the leg, the abdomen location bleeds out. Then you are dead. That was real difficult too, wasn't it?

I HOPE there is no hit point pool!

 

[Wulf Corbett]

It is also worth pointing out to those of you who think we should accept change for change's sake that a number of us were not looking for or expecting a re-write of runequest at all. All we wanted was for someone to put it back on the market and support the product so our new players could buy there own rulebooks and so there would be a a few new supplements available to us from time to time.

In that case you should look to Chaosium, who retain the rights to BRP, and still claim they will be releasing a new "Deluxe Basic Roleplaying Game" someday. Mongoose only has the rights to the name RuneQuest and a licence to Glorantha. They could not, legally, produce a product legally identical to BRP. Likewise, Chaosium cannot produce a game named RuneQuest, nor one set in Glorantha. Things move on.

Wulf

 

[kintire]

But as I said, they appear to have simplified things greatly, and while that's fine for many people, that's just not what I was hoping for

That's fair enough, but its also not what you based your objections on earlier. It looked like you were simply DnD phobic, and resented anything that could be interpreted as being vaguely like it. I mean, how exactly is the ability to run up walls oversimplifying the game? Your point seemed to be "it has a faint connection to DnD. Bin it!"

I think it would be unfair to condemn the system until we've seen it. there will be some bits about which we are not happy. You can't please everyone!

For example:

A positive thing in the creature stats is that we definitely have Ducks

Ah. Ducks are still in. I am filled with Unthinkable Joy. Woo hoo.