Mark Dunder
Mongoose
Is there a lot of difference between the old system and the new system? Why I ask is because I'm wondering how much work it would entail to convert old characters over the the new system?
Difference between old and new?
- Thread starter Mark Dunder
- Start date
Wulf Corbett
Mongoose
It's easy to convert, in fact if you're just running 'monsters' you don't actually need to convert! (Although I dropped out of playtesting as I couldn't get enough interest from my group)Mark Dunder said:
Wulf
Mark Dunder
Mongoose
Good, also about the monsters. It will be some time before I am able to get the new game.
Weapons and such are about the same too?
Weapons and such are about the same too?
Wulf Corbett
Mongoose
There's a bit more difference there, but, again, for monsters it's not significant.Mark Dunder said:
Wulf
Sgt. Brassones
Mongoose
When you guys refer to the 'old edition' do you mean the Avalon Hill or Chaosium edition?
Howdy,
By all accounts, it is to be VERY similar to RQ3 (AH). I guess the major changes will be with combat (to a degree) and magic. Sweet....
I was one of the playtesters for AH and their aborted RQ4 - the only thing interesting to come out of that were the new fatique and ENC rules, as well as the damage dial-down. All of the damage was cycled down a bit - armour blocked a point or two less at the high end, and weapons did a base die of damage (dagger did a d4, sword d8, etc.). Damage bonus was reduced to a plus instead of a die (+1 instead of +1d4, +2 insead of +1d6, etc.). That's all really just trivia at this point, but I ended up adopting it into my regular RQ game as this reduced the quick limb incapacitation that you saw with RQ2/3. This also meant that characters had a *chance* to survive combat without massive protection spells and chain/plate.
RQ4 would have been an odd duck... the core game world was to be Ancient Europe/Med circa Alexander the Great if I remember correctly. I didn't pay much attention, as I just wanted to look at the new rules.
I can't WAIT for the new game!
Ken
By all accounts, it is to be VERY similar to RQ3 (AH). I guess the major changes will be with combat (to a degree) and magic. Sweet....
I was one of the playtesters for AH and their aborted RQ4 - the only thing interesting to come out of that were the new fatique and ENC rules, as well as the damage dial-down. All of the damage was cycled down a bit - armour blocked a point or two less at the high end, and weapons did a base die of damage (dagger did a d4, sword d8, etc.). Damage bonus was reduced to a plus instead of a die (+1 instead of +1d4, +2 insead of +1d6, etc.). That's all really just trivia at this point, but I ended up adopting it into my regular RQ game as this reduced the quick limb incapacitation that you saw with RQ2/3. This also meant that characters had a *chance* to survive combat without massive protection spells and chain/plate.
RQ4 would have been an odd duck... the core game world was to be Ancient Europe/Med circa Alexander the Great if I remember correctly. I didn't pay much attention, as I just wanted to look at the new rules.
I can't WAIT for the new game!
Ken
Lieutenant Rasczak
Mongoose
kwinland said:Howdy,
By all accounts, it is to be VERY similar to RQ3 (AH). I guess the major changes will be with combat (to a degree) and magic. Sweet....
I was one of the playtesters for AH and their aborted RQ4 - the only thing interesting to come out of that were the new fatique and ENC rules, as well as the damage dial-down. All of the damage was cycled down a bit - armour blocked a point or two less at the high end, and weapons did a base die of damage (dagger did a d4, sword d8, etc.). Damage bonus was reduced to a plus instead of a die (+1 instead of +1d4, +2 insead of +1d6, etc.). That's all really just trivia at this point, but I ended up adopting it into my regular RQ game as this reduced the quick limb incapacitation that you saw with RQ2/3. This also meant that characters had a *chance* to survive combat without massive protection spells and chain/plate.
RQ4 would have been an odd duck... the core game world was to be Ancient Europe/Med circa Alexander the Great if I remember correctly. I didn't pay much attention, as I just wanted to look at the new rules.
I can't WAIT for the new game!
Ken
I just hope its not TOO anti Glorantha, the whole presentation of RQ3 meant it lost a LOT of the flavour of the second edition for me. In the end with pretty much went back to RQ2 with the parts of the third edition we actually liked!
Couldn't agree more. imho It seemed to try to be a generic system without really providing anything else to back it up in the rules, which may sound odd but then I'm comparing it with RQ2, which was still generic but was emphatically bronze age/Glorantha and D&D/d20 which is emphatically a mix of every fantasy/S&S source in the basic rules.Rasczak said:
I know my players ended up with a standard "Max protection/Min encumbrance" armour set up which they considered a baseline. It ended up being blu-tacked to my mantlepiece and the PCs referring to it in such terms as "I'll buy a set of mantlepiece armour...."
D )I ended up with a 2.5 with loads of stuff from WF put in (as it came out, that is) taking bits from Glorantha as suited. ENC, though, seemed to work a bit better in most situations in RQ3...
Well, personally I do not use Encumbrance rules in any game. And as for availability, I really love the rules in WFRP2, where you have to make Gossip tests in order to be able to even find someone who has such an item in the first place, then you have to start bargain for it.
That takes care of players who buy equipment because it gives them the best advantage rules-wise.
That takes care of players who buy equipment because it gives them the best advantage rules-wise.
I have to pray that it uses the RQ2 mechanics with only a few of the RQ3 tweaks maintained. Certainly the appalling HeroQuest mechanics turned me off the game.
The majority of RQ players of my acquaintance liked it because combat was deadly, not for the heavily GM led storytelling outcomes which the HeroQuest mechanics encouraged. I love the Gloranthan mythos but the way in which it's developed since AH got the licence has depressed me hugely.
I hope Mongoose are going to do a decent job of the legacy.
The majority of RQ players of my acquaintance liked it because combat was deadly, not for the heavily GM led storytelling outcomes which the HeroQuest mechanics encouraged. I love the Gloranthan mythos but the way in which it's developed since AH got the licence has depressed me hugely.
I hope Mongoose are going to do a decent job of the legacy.
TrippyHippy
Emperor Mongoose
I just hope they apply the principle of 'less number crunching' throughout.
TrippyHippy said:
I agree. Hopefully it will be an even quicker version of the Stormbringer 5 rules-set. That is probably the fastest BRP version I have ever used.
That said, there are many ways to increase the speed of a basic role-playing system (although RQ now does not use BRP, it assumingly is derived from it).
My best recommendation for running combat faster, when you have to keep track of HPs on different body parts is; Don't. Just cut their total HP in half (round up) and keep track of that. Just use the hit location to determine the effects of armour. After GMing BRP systems since 1982, none of the players I have GMed for has ever caught me doing this (and I have played with some serious rules-lawyers).
Wulf Corbett
Mongoose
Actually, it's the other way around. RuneQuest came first, and BRP was derived from THAT.Archer said:
Wulf
Similar threads
